Last week I kicked off a series on this blog about liturgical changes within parish family 49 (colloquially, the Catholic Communities of the Olympic Peninsula). My first post in this series was a prologue – an attempt to lay a basic foundation for us in preparation for our reflections on individual areas within our liturgical celebration. In this post, I would like to focus in on communion at Mass. While some are less apparent, other changes may be more visible to the average parishioner. Below is a list of the newly instituted changes, with links to specific sections for those who wish to jump directly to them:

 1) Changes to for our Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHCs)

• • no longer part of the entrance procession
  • wear their normal clothing rather than albs (though there are new(ish) dress expectations)
  • come up as or after the presider receives communion
  • only using minimum necessary at Mass (typically 2-3 instead of 4-5)

2) Changes to distribution of communion at Mass

• • the Precious Blood is only offered from stationary positions at the sanctuary
  • the presider brings communion to the pewbound
  • the presider offers communion to all present in the nave

3) Blessings not being offered during communion

Before diving into their changes, it may be helpful to acknowledge the proper title of those laity who are commissioned by the pastor to assist in the distribution of communion at Mass and to the homebound: Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. For many, this will be new terminology – it is common in many (most?) parishes to refer to anyone who assists with communion simply as a ‘Eucharistic minister’. It may come as a surprise to hear that the Church expressly (if gently!) rebukes this practice. In 2004, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament¹ promulgated an instruction titled Redemptionis Sacramentum. At the beginning of the section aptly titled “The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion”, the document has this to say:

As has already been recalled, “the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest”. Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone. (Redemptionis Sacramentum, 154)

To avoid what some have termed ‘the clericalization of the laity’², the Church insists that our naming conventions reflect what we believe about the different vocations of the laity and clerics. Likewise, we in our various parishes are working to reform our own practice in this area, dropping the term ‘Eucharistic ministers’ and (re)learning the practice of referring to lay ministers assisting with communion by their proper title. Happily, the acronym ‘EM’ can be used for both, so we’ve got a leg up!

Mindful of the above, you might see the logic in the other changes that have gone into effect – these reflect an effort to honor the proper vocations of clerics & laity while also taking advantage of the opportunity and gift that is extraordinary ministry. The first two of the changes most visibly reflect the ‘extraordinary’ of EMHCs. As ministers who are, by definition, being called out of their normal role (assisting at Mass as part of the congregation), it is fitting that this be evident in, well, that being exactly what happens (as opposed to being part of the procession of ordinary ministers). This is similarly reflected in the attire of our EMHCs, though we have established a basic dress code to honor the dignity of the role (nice shoes, nice pants [or skirt/dress for women who so desire], and a nice shirt).

The timing of the EMHCs’ entrance into the sanctuary also affirms the extraordinary nature of the ministry. In the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America, the bishops offer this reminder:

If extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are required by pastoral need, they should not approach the altar before the Priest has received Communion. After the Priest has concluded his own Communion, he distributes Communion to the extraordinary ministers, assisted by the Deacon, and then hands the sacred vessels to them for distribution of Holy Communion to the people. (NDRHC, 38)

Credit where it is due: this has been the regular practice of our extraordinary ministers of holy communion at most of our parishes – and where it has not been the practice has been due solely to not knowing! Our recent changes have been a good occasion for learning the ‘why’ behind the ‘what’ of our practices.

Finally, we have the change from a typical schedule of 4-5 EMHCs down to a schedule of 2-3 EMHCs at Mass. In the same section of Redemptionis Sacramentum, the CDWDS offers what I find to be a bit of a bracing admonition:

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. (Sacramentum Redemptionis, 158)

Though I’ve often placed limits based on practicality (there are only so many sacred vessels a priest wants to have to purify every single Mass!), I did not realize until fairly recently how emphatically the Church insists on the priest being the one to administer communion. And yet, here we have a paragraph that starts and ends with clear limits: EMHCs are to be used only in specific circumstances – and a brief prolongation of the Mass is “not at all sufficient reason“!

After discussion about and consideration of our parish circumstances, I realized that we simply don’t need as many EMHCs at Mass as we formerly had. Though it will take a little bit of practice to get the cadence of distributing between two lines, most of us priests have no difficulty offering the Precious Body to every congregant who comes to Mass at our parishes – and our churches are of a size that even when we are at max capacity, this only adds a few minutes (at most!) to the communion procession. And on a personal note, I get to be that much more connected to parishioners who come forward – something especially precious in light of the rotation schedule for us priests in this parish family!

If you take note in Masses at Queen of Angels and Saint Joseph, you’ll see that we have made an important exception: having one EMHC who is charged with bringing communion to the choir, which allows them to lead music fairly continuously and without the significant disruption to their ministry that coming down from the loft (and going back up!) would require. For those pewbound parishioners who can not come to the reserved section up front (typically for medical or health reasons), that same EMHC will offer them communion as well.

Given all that we’ve considered in light of the distinction between ordinary and extraordinary ministers, these changes will likely be unsurprising. The change to the distribution of the Precious Blood, however, is perhaps worthy of some note. In this we have moved to stationary distribution of the Precious Blood – previously, one of the EMHCs would travel first to the pewbound to offer communion and then upstairs to the choir. Though this practice was very well-intentioned, the risk of spilling – both in trying to navigate among parishioners & pews as well as in ascending and descending the choir loft stairs – was simply too great. In order to safeguard the Eucharist (and ourselves) from accidental spills (and the scandal and sorrow that comes with that!), I made the decision to restrict the distribution of the Precious Blood to stations at the front of the church in the sanctuary.

This is an occasion for us to recall what the Church teaches regarding the Sacred Species and reception of communion. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, we read that “Since Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species, communion under the species of bread alone makes it possible to receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace.” (CCC 1390) Someone who receives Christ in just one species of the Eucharist receives Him no less than someone who receives under both – likewise, someone who receives under both species receives no more!

Finally, we come to the priest distributing communion to all of the congregation (with the exception of the choir, as explained earlier). As we have explored in no small depth, this is an important part of his vocation – which is explained in the same paragraph of Redemptionis Sacramentum that distinguishes between ordinary and extraordinary ministers of holy communion:

Moreover, also by reason of their sacred Ordination, the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon, 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. (Sacramentum Redemptionis, 154)

I find that final sentence particularly convicting: that the ministerial office of bishops, priests, and deacons if fully and accurately brought to light in their administration of communion to the lay faithful! Part of the fulfillment of my priesthood is the offering of the Eucharist to the people of Christ’s flock: it is a visible sign of the offering made by Christ both at the Last Supper and on the Cross! Heady stuff, this – in ways that are both affecting and humbling.

The final change for our reflection here has to do with blessings at communion. Though it is probably most obvious at our school Masses, where I have instructed that those who are not receiving communion remain seated, eagle-eyed parishioners will have noticed that blessings are also not offered to those who come forward (typically with their arms crossed) during the communion procession. Anyone who does come forward with their arms crossed or otherwise indicating that they are not receiving communion (at any Mass, that is) is greeted briefly and then goes back to their pew.

Before going further, it should be acknowledged that the practice of offering blessings at communion is so common as to be nearly ubiquitous. Though the origins of the practice are uncertain, there is some speculation that it may have taken off after a televised Mass in 2003 where Pope John Paul II, after having given communion to a woman, blessed her child. And for many, a natural question might be ‘if the pope can do it, couldn’t we all?’.

In fact, the Second Vatican Council has something to say in this regard, found in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium), where the Church offers these general norms:

1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.

2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.

3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

(Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22)

That third point should give us pause: no other person – even if he is a priest – may add, remove or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority. Even the authority of bishops and bishops’ conferences to do so must operate within the limits set by the Church. The pope, being the supreme authority within the Church, may make changes or exceptions to ecclesial law (as opposed to divine law, which is the Lord’s alone) – but the rest of us must adhere to it unless expressly permitted otherwise.

And lest we think that this is a forgotten holdover from a decades-old Church document (itself a shaky premise when considering how we hold fast to centuries-old documents & teachings!), we would do well to consider the writing of our archbishop here in Seattle. In 2020, Archbishop Etienne promulgated his pastoral letter The Work of Redemption: Eucharistic Belief and Practice in the Archdiocese of Seattle. Among the many things he covered (it is well worth a read!), he not only references but quotes in its entirety the third point of the norms above. Just a couple of years later, Pope Francis promulgated an apostolic letter Desiderio Desideravi, in which he writes “every aspect of the celebration must be carefully tended to (space, time, gestures, words, objects, vestments, song, music…) and every rubric must be observed.” (Desiderio Desideravi, 23)

While the answer to whether we can do as Pope John Paul II did is clearly ‘no’, this particular question has not gone unconsidered in the time since. In 2008, the then-Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament received a dubia (question) from two men asking about this issue. Though their response establishes no new norms, it is worth noting that they did indeed respond and offered several key points. The first point – and perhaps the most important! – was that “The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.” (Protocol No. 930/08/L)

To all of this, I would add a pastoral concern of my own: that of replacing reception of the Lord at communion. It has been a source of frustration & great sorrow to see Catholics come up consistently and over the space of years to receive a blessing rather than receive communion. Over my time as a priest, I have come to understand that for many, if not most, of them this is due to unresolved marriage issues and/or other ongoing struggles with grave sin. To be clear: I make no judgements! But for many, receiving a blessing has become an acceptable substitute for making the necessary changes to their lives, going to confession, and returning to full communion with Christ and His Church. As a pastor of souls, I feel especially convicted to assist and exhort all to worthily receive communion at the very least once a year, as the Church requires of us all (CCC 2041), if not as often as possible. That means starting with the obvious: not participating in the substitution that blessings have become!

A final thought on this subject – one inspired by a conversation with our previous ordinary, Archbishop Sartain. There he made a point with which I heartily agree: even if blessings are not to be offered, there should be some kind of acknowledgement or exchange between someone who joins the communion procession without actually receiving. No one should be made to feel as if they are unwelcome or less-than. After all, we are all unworthy of the gifts bestowed upon us, communicants and non-communicants alike! Though the practice may vary among priests, I have taken the approach of a kind of Christian greeting, bowing and offering something along the lines of “may the Lord be with you always”.

Thank you for taking time to read through all of this. In my desire for completeness, I have undoubtedly written less concisely than might have been possible – I hope that both the content and the length demonstrate my desire to help bring understanding about these liturgical changes. As I shared in my August post about liturgical celebrations in our parish family, the highest values are our principles (the universal teaching and law of the Church) and our policies (the local laws of our archdiocese and parishes). The highest of these is of course union with Christ and His Church.

May we patiently allow time for these changes to bear fruit (change is hard!), praying in the meantime for God’s grace to continue to unfold in our liturgical celebrations – especially in the communion we receive and share at Mass.

1. With the promulgation of Praedicate Evangelium, The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament was renamed the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament. Reference is made to the old name because Redemptionis Sacramentum was published while the old name was in use and so references the DDWDS as a congregation. ….totally not confusing, I know! (return to text) 

2. “Often we have given in to the temptation of thinking that committed lay people are those dedicated to the works of the Church and/or the matters of the parish or the diocese, and we have reflected little on how to accompany baptized people in their public and daily life; on how in their daily activities, with the responsibilities they have, they are committed as Christians in public life. Without realizing it, we have generated a lay elite, believing that committed lay people are only those who work in the matters “of priests”, and we have forgotten, overlooked, the believers who very often burn out their hope in the daily struggle to live the faith.” (Pope Francis in a 2016 letter of His Holiness Pope Francis to Cardinal Marc Ouellet) (return to text)

• Catechism of the Catholic Church
• Desiderio Desideravi (Apostolic letter on the liturgical formation of the People of God)
• General Instruction of the Roman Missal
• Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America
• On Giving Blessings During the Communion Rite (Protocol No. 930/08/L, dated November 22, 2008 and commentary)
• Redemptionis Sacramentum (On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist)
• Sacrosanctum Concilium (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy)
• The Work of Redemption: Eucharistic Belief and Practice in the Archdiocese of Seattle