There are a lot of very strange things occurring in Catholic churches due to Covid. Things which are rather inexplicable and sometimes somewhat frustrating. As with everything, we must use these as opportunities to grow in holiness. At the same time, I do wonder where some of these strange ideas are coming from.
As a little background information, on Sunday, I attempted to go to Mass at the church where I have been making an effort to attend daily. When I arrived, the lady informs me that all the places are reserved and nothing can be changed. I had attempted to reserve a seat on Wednesday, thinking it was the first possible day, but I was told you could register before this now.
It has happened before that I did not register for Mass on time. In those cases, I would show up early to the church and see if anyone else had cancelled and if so I would simply replace them.
So this past Sunday, they seem to have implemented a brand new rule - you cannot replace someone else who will not be attending. It's very strange and makes little sense. As an example, another lady in the same boat as me who attends daily Mass, told the lady that her daughter was registered but that her daughter would not be showing up that day. She asked if she could take her daughter's place. The answer was no.
It's important to realize that in the past (i.e. the previous week), this was a common practice. If someone did not or would not be showing up, another person could take their place. This only makes sense. What other difference does it make? The registration's only purpose is to ensure there are not too many people in the church at the same time. I get that churches must strictly adhere to the maximum number of people. I mean it's not like it's a Costco!
So this person would allow no one in, not even to replace someone who would definitely not be attending. So I went to another church with someone else. This church, of course, had its own set of rules. Every church seems different with regards to Covid rules which is odd in itself.
We arrive at this more "modern" church which has a distinctly "modern" style of music, by which I mean of course from the 70s. Also, they do not have kneelers. They don't even have pews, but rather soft individual chairs.
So I and the person I am with sit up front, as close to the altar as possible. Once the consecration has taken place, the priest comes to the middle to give out Holy Eucharist. They have decided to allow everyone from the right side section go up to receive communion first. Once they are all done, it will be our turn on the left side. Again, I am the first person of that section. The last person of the right side receives communion. An usher tells me to wait a second after she squirts some hand sanitizer on my hands. To my surprise, just as I'm about to present myself to receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord, the priest just walks away. Huh? What is going on here? Yes, the priest just leaves. And in his place is an older lady with her own chalice ready to give out communion. You've got to be kidding me! Where is the priest going?
As I am the first person in line, and not knowing what else to do, I receive communion from this EMHC. This is one of the strangest arrangements I have seen to date. You'd think being as close to the priest as possible would mean he would give you communion. Also strange is that he went from one line to another. Why would he do this? What purpose does it serve? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
But a bigger question is why are there EMHCs in these circumstances anyway? Churches are at a fraction of their usual capacity. Where I am, churches can have a maximum of 100 people total in the structure. In previous times, these same churches may have gotten 500 or 1000 parishioners. So 500 people can be handled with 2 people distributing communion, but with 100 people you still need 2 people? How does this make sense.
Obviously it only makes sense if the EMHCs are being improperly used.
In the official Catholic Church document titled Redemptionis sacramentum, there are clear instructions as to when EMHCs can be properly employed. (Redemptionis sacramentum (Latin for "Sacrament of Redemption") is the title of an instruction on the proper way to celebrate Mass in the Roman Rite and, with the necessary adjustments, in other Latin liturgical rites. Source: Wikipedia)
In sections 157 to 158, it states:
If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed. Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it. The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons.
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.[259] 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.
As can clearly be seen from this instruction, having a group of laypeople give out communion regardless of the circumstances is prohibited. Extraordinary ministers (as the name implies) must only be used in extraordinary circumstances such as those listed above. These people have become all too common. Another important part is that even if such people are at a Mass, if there is sufficient capacity for the priest or deacon to distribute communion, they should, and the EMHC should stand down.
Obviously a physically capable, relatively young priest should not have any issue distributing communion to under 100 people, especially since he does that on a regular basis to begin with.
The priest is acting in persona Christi and his hands are consecrated and ultimately should be the only hands actually touching communion. We have seen many abuses caused by communion in the hand. Covid was just another excuse to ban the practice of communion on the tongue.
This isn't quite as bad though as an incident which I witnessed at a small church in a small community. The priest, having consecrated the host, passed on the chalice to a layperson who distributed all of the communion as the priest simply watched. There were no more than a couple of dozen people in this church. He was not physically incapacitated since he had been previously walking quite a bit during his homily, I guess to give a more "friendly" feel to his sermon. Yet, he chose to sit by on the sidelines and let someone without holy orders do his role for him. Quite disappointing.
As I have spoken about often, churches have countless procedures in place allegedly to prevent the spread of Covid-19. To an outsider looking in, they would assume these Christians are far more concerned about a relatively non-lethal and overall low-risk illness than they are about their eternal salvation or the miracle taking place before them at every Mass.
I think it's important for priests to emphasize the importance and supernatural reality of the Eucharist instead of doing the things mentioned in this article.
