www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology To change just ONE THING in American Catholic worship

I can only reference the RC church where I play, since I am Byzantine, not Latin. This church of 900 + families has 2 priests now. In the early 1970s, there were 3 permanently stationed there. Back then, the priests who were not saying mass came to the church to help distribute communion. The other priest now stays in the rectory and the presiding priest uses a couple of ministers. I also remember that sermons were less frequent and less lengthy. Now, you always have a 20 minute sermon, whether or not father really has anything to say that's worth listening to. The mass itself is a a bit shorter than in earlier days, since the priests have the option of using one of the shorter canons. There was only one canon prior to Vatican II and it was longer. But really, what is an excessive number of communicants? When does it take too long to distribute communion? Is 10 minutes too long? I don't think so. How long IS too long?

Dear Alice,

I do not subscribe to the "gloom and doom" movement in modern Catholicism. I do not find heresy under every rock nor do I fear for the future of the Church.

Peace,

Charles

Dear Charles,

Neither do I, and that was the point I was trying to make to Stojgniev. I hope that it came across that way.

Blessings,
Alice

Dear Alice,

Thanks for your post. Your posts reflect great faith and wisdom.

Whenever I get bothered and upset by events going on in and around the Church, I remember our Lord`s promise to be with the Church, His bride, to the end of time.

I often wonder how some folks can expend so much energy on arguing about non-essentials and still miss the beauty which abounds each instant in the Church.

As I mentioned in one of my posts above, my pastor is not well. He is 75 years old, has a tumor at the base of his brain, and has decided against surgery since his doctor says that at his age, he`ll live just as long without surgery. Our pastor has a dog, a standard sized chihuahua. The dog dotes on him and brings him a lot of joy. A couple of months ago, a non-parishioner who attends our Saturday vigil Mass on a regular basis, wrote a letter to our bishop, excoriating our pastor because the dog wandered into the church - not during liturgy - looking for his master. He told the bishop that our pastor permits our church to be desecrated and the Blessed Sacrament profaned by allowing the dog to enter the church. This person then followed up by additional letters to our bishop, insulting and demeaning letters. I relate this because it is an example, IMHO, of people who get carried away with worrying about things which really are of little or no importance. It is nitpicking to the worst degree, but it is, unfortunately, not uncommon these days. I could relate other stories, but I don`t want to venture any farther off topic than I have. Suffice it to say that this poor man (the letter writer) is on my prayer list.

Peace,

Charles

I agree with what Charles wrote.

I would add the following personal observations. is, by personal observation. I have attended a fair number of Catholic parishes around the U.S. Those who come to Mass are generally reverent; those who serve as lectors and Eucharistic Ministers are usually quite reverent. Also, I am a Eucharistic Minister. The work is enormously humbling: both when I bring the Eucharist to the sick and when I distribute the Eucharist at Mass.

Finally, I would add this. I saw an archbishop from Central America (Guatemala?) on EWTN several months ago. He said that in his country, lay ministries generally make the laity *more* religious. Furthermore, lay ministries were starting to produce more religious vocations among the children of the lay ministers.

--John

Dear John,

Thanks for your post. All the lay ministers I know - and I know many, from across my diocese - are dedicated to the furthering of God`s kingdom. They realize that they do not own a ministry - it is a calling to serve their brothers and sisters. It is a way - one way among many - to fulfill the obligations of our baptismal promises.

You said that the work of an EMOC is humbling. Indeed, it is. I have learned so much about the value of suffering from my sick and dying fellow parishioners. Their faith in the promise of the resurrection has strengthened my faith. Whenever I feel sorry for myself, I remember each one of them.

Peace,

Charles

Dear John and Charles,

May God bless you both for the special ministry/service you have undertaken for your Church!

Humbly,
Alice

The ministers I know are very good people and approach their work reverently. They are particularly effective in visiting the sick, since the two priests can not get around to everyone in a large parish. But I will say that the emphasis on "bread and cup," the tacky pottery chalices, and the wholesale handling of the sacred species by the laity after Vatican II, among other similar things, have caused diminished respect for the eucharist. Perhaps that is why the Latin Church stopped communion in the hand in earlier times. It is not a new or modern practice but dates from the early centuries. It was stopped because of abuses. The former pastor of the church where I play was horrified to find a host crushed in the pages of a hymnal. Sad to say, things like this do happen. I think most people do try to be reverent and respectful, but there are always those few who don't try. We have gotten some recent Hispanic members of the parish whose reverence has been a good example for all of us to follow.

Dear Charles (byzanTN),

Greetings!

You mentioned pottery chalices. If the parish you play at is still using them, they should discontinue their use. The latest instructions from the Holy See do not allow for pottery or glass vessels. Perhaps a gentle remark to the pastor about that might help ... or might not.

As for lack of respect for the sacred species, most parishes do tell their EMOCs to make certain that communicants do not walk off without consuming the sacred species. However, that in itself is not a guarantee against profanation. Those who wish to profane the Eucharist can just as easily receive on the tongue and remove the host from their mouths.

I disagree with your statement that "the wholesale handling of the sacred species by the laity after Vatican II, among other similar things, have caused diminished respect for the eucharist." I don`t think that there`s a causal relationship there. IMHO, the lack of respect for the Eucharist, as well as for things sacred in general, has deeper roots: the lack of proper and adequate catechesis. One cannot respect that of which one lacks knowledge. (Sorry for that convoluted sentence. I just don`t like ending sentences with prepositions, even when they sound better.)

We RCs have lost at least one generation who do not value tradition (with a small t) precisely because they were not taught about it. New does not equate with good - nor does old - and, conversely, new does not equate with bad, nor does old. Actually, when referring to the Pian and Pauline liturgies, I would prefer to use the terms adequate and inadequate. I realize that some believe that the Pian (aka Tridentine) liturgy is as near perfection as one can get, but it, like the Pauline liturgy, has its inadequacies. Unfortunately, liturgy has engendered such furious and uncharitable debate in the RC that it has become almost impossible for anyone to discuss it reasonably and rationally. At both extremes, there is an "all or nothing" mentality and really shameful statements are made. The dead, who cannot defend themselves, are accused of all manner of untoward and evil things, from Paul VI and Annibale Bugnini on one side to Cardinals Ottaviani, Bacci, Browne, et al on the other side. There are fantastic tales of Masonic membership, heresy, murder, etc. leveled at men who gave their lives to the Church. So many people have been demonized. That is a real scandal. I really don`t know if there are people of sufficient stature who have the emotional energy left to tackle this incredibly charged area of church life - an area which is the most important aspect of our spiritual lives. We simply can`t go on with these "wars" any longer. Sorry for this long post.

Peace,

Charles

Dear Alice,

May God bless you for the charity and strong faith which you bring to this Forum.

Peace,

Charles

ByzanTN wrote:

I can see the use of the ministers when large numbers of communicants are there, but the problem is the use of the ministers when they are not warranted. For example, when the priest sits down and lets the ministers distribute, or when the line is not excessively long. Those ministers are supposed to be extraordinary, not ordinary.


I agree. There are situations when the eucharistic ministers are warranted, but there is much abuse in many of the American RC parishes I have visited.

I notice that the liturgies on EWTN do not have eucharistic ministers.

Another problem is the disruption of spatial focus. In a Greek Catholic or Orthodox liturgy, all the attention focuses on the center of the church where the priest is distributing. In my former Byzantine parish, the eucharist was the main point of the liturgy. The energy was almost physical and it always seemed as it time did stop for a few minutes. In RC parishes there's just too much rushing about, mainly by the eucharistic ministers. In Poland it is common for one or more priests to go as soon as communion begins to the back of the church & distribute there (if the church is crowded many times people come to middle aisle & the priest walks up & down the aisle distributing). Many times there IS a logistics problem - how to distribute to large numbers of people in a church packed so tight you can't move - very common situation in Polish cities.

Another problem - it seems that some American eucharistic ministers want to "fellowship" with their communicants, through eye contact, smiles. The focus should be on the eucharist.

I think the ultimate goal should be to provide reverence to the eucharist & then have the priest distributing for some more or less precise time (10 minutes minimum?), in order to provide the atmosphere of reverence & time for meditation. Perhaps the eucharistic ministers should distribute only after communion has begun & it has been determined how many ministers will probably be needed.

The criticism was directed at those eucharistic ministers who get so caught up in their own ministry, are so eager to play their role, that they don't realize that their actions distract. The goal is not to give each of them the opportunity to stand near the altar & distribute communion - the goal is to help the priest WHEN NEEDED.

Stojgniev

Dear Stojgniev,

While I respect your opinions, I must disagree with you.

You wrote: "there is much abuse in many of the American RC parishes I have visited." Just how many American RC parishes have you visited and what abuses are there, specifically?

You wrote: "I notice that the liturgies on EWTN do not have eucharistic ministers." That is because there are enough priests and deacons to effectively and efficiently distribute the Eucharist.

You wrote: "In RC parishes there's just too much rushing about, mainly by the eucharistic ministers... Another problem - it seems that some American eucharistic ministers want to "fellowship" with their communicants, through eye contact, smiles. The focus should be on the eucharist."

Please define "rushing about." Do these EMOCs go running through the church? As for EMOCs smiling, what would you have them do - frown, scowl? The reception of our Lord is a moment of joy.

You wrote: "I think the ultimate goal should be to provide reverence to the eucharist & then have the priest distributing for some more or less precise time (10 minutes minimum?), in order to provide the atmosphere of reverence & time for meditation. Perhaps the eucharistic ministers should distribute only after communion has begun & it has been determined how many ministers will probably be needed."

If you want to disrupt the liturgy, then this is a recipe for it. You want the determination of how many EMOCs will be needed after the distribution of communion has begun. This is both impractical and disruptive. Who is to decide how many and at what point EMOCs will be needed - the celebrant who is already distributing the Eucharist? Parish priests and their associates know approximately how many people come to each Mass on a regular basis and how many people come to communion. In every parish with which I am familiar, the number of EMOCs used is based on the usual number of communicants at each Mass. Father Deacon John made an excellent point about prolonging the distribution of communion by priests who usually binate or trinate.

Another consideration is that most large parishes have back to back Masses and the movement of those leaving and those arriving has to be taken into account.

You wrote: "The criticism was directed at those eucharistic ministers who get so caught up in their own ministry, are so eager to play their role, that they don't realize that their actions distract. The goal is not to give each of them the opportunity to stand near the altar & distribute communion - the goal is to help the priest WHEN NEEDED."

Please explain, precisely, what you mean by "those eucharistic ministers who get so caught up in their role, that they don`t realize that their actions distract." In another post, I asked you to explain a similar comment, about the fuss they created, but you have not given any reply which gives specifics as to your criticisms.

You also made a comment about EMOCs who "...are so eager to play their role...." IMHO, your words belie a basic dislike of EMOCs and border on sarcasm. EMOCs do not "play" a role any more than priests or deacons "play" a role. They all minister, albeit in different ways.

Most parishes use EMOCs only when needed. When the Eucharist is distributed under both species in a parish which has one or two priests, EMOCs are usually needed. When there is a large parish with insufficient clergy, EMOCs are needed.

Comparing the Church in Poland, which has a good priest-to-layperson ratio to that in the U.S., which has a steadily widening ratio, does not provide a valid comparison.

I wish you peace.

Charles

I tend to agree that the use of the lay ministers is not always needed. I have no problem with them when a genuine need exists. The parish where I play is very traditional, so when I see abuses it is generally when I am visiting somewhere else. I was at a mass awhile back that had a congregation of 45 people at most. Distributing communion was one priest and 3 of the lay ministers. Obviously, some factor other than necessity was at work there. It doesn't take 4 people to distribute communion to 45 people. And you are right, some folks do get too caught up in their ministries and lose sight of what it is they are supposed to be doing. Lay ministers are not, and will never be, mini-priests. In the organ loft, we have ceiling fans that were installed because of the year-round heat. But we can't run the fans on anything but low speed, since higher speeds give the pipe organ sound a vibrato effect - kind of like a kid singing through a fan. I always have to turn the fans down before playing anything. One overly aggressive (and annoying) lay minister asked just what my ministry was. I could have said "organist," but the demons had control of me that day. I told her I was the extraordinary minister of the ceiling fans.

Dear Charles (byzanTN),

I agree that EMOCs should only be used when needed. In the church which had a congregation of 45 people, was communion distributed under both species? If so, I can see the need for one EMOC, possibly two (both for the cup) if the logistics of the church made the positioning of just one person with the cup awkward. If communion was not distributed under both species, then EMOCs should not have been used. The EMOCs in my parish are very attuned to necessity. If there are concelebrants, there are no EMOCs. If there is a deacon, one less EMOC, etc.

In my diocese, where communion under both species is diocesan policy, EMOCs are a necessity. Very few parishes have more than two priests, many of them with only one.

Every parish has people - whether involved in ministry or not - who test our patience. I just add them to my prayer list. I have found that it is better to pray for a person than to let that person bother me and upset my day.

Peace,

Charles

Then you are more saintly than I am. As organists go, I am actually pretty easy to get along with. Every now and then, for my own peace and sanity, I do have to live up to the image of a temperamental musician.