Communion Statistics - Request for Data

[Rainaldo]

I'm trying to gather some data about the use of EMHCs and its effect on the liturgy.

I have a suspicion that a single priest distributing on the tongue to a congregation kneeling at an altar rail is as efficient as - or is more efficient than - the use of EMHCs.

I've done some field observations at both OF and EF masses and I've tentatively confirmed this to be the case.

Would some of you attending either Form help me out by reporting what you find in your parishes?

Here's the information that would help me:

• How many EMHCs?
• How many communicants?
• How much time from the first congregant's reception to the last?
• That translates into how many receptions per second?

At an EF I went to I got just about 1 reception per second while at an OF with four EMHCs plus the priest I got a mere 0.75 reception per second.

[MarkThompson]

Originally Posted by Rainaldo

At an EF I went to I got just about 1 reception per second

He'd have to have been saying "CorpusChristicustodiatanimamtuaminvitam aeternamAmen" at one heck of a blistering speed for that to be remotely true. Was it anything like this?

[Fiasco]

Originally Posted by MarkThompson

He'd have to have been saying "CorpusChristicustodiatanimamtuaminvitam aeternamAmen" [The Germans have some pretty long words ]. at one heck of a blistering speed for that to be remotely true. Was it anything like this?

As a stammererererererer, i wouldn`t QUITE be able to keep up with that!!!
i was worried that he might swallow his tongue with one of his breath intakes.

[Lancer]

CARA may be your best first step...housed at Georgetown University...but not part of GU.

Hope that this is helpful.
Pax Christi

CENTER FOR APPLIED RESEARCH IN THE APOSTOLATE
PUTTING SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH AT THE SERVICE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SINCE 1964.

CARA is a national, non-profit, Georgetown University affiliated research center that conducts social scientific studies about the Catholic Church. Founded in 1964, CARA has three major dimensions to its mission:
to increase the Church's self understandingto serve the applied research needs of Church decision-makersto advance scholarly research on religion, particularly Catholicism

CARA has more than 40 years of experience in quality social science research on the Catholic Church. We offer a range of research and consulting services for dioceses, parishes, religious communities and institutes, and other Catholic organizations. CARA’s longstanding policy is to let research findings stand on their own and never take an advocacy position or go into areas outside its social science competence. All CARA researchers have advanced degrees in relevant academic disciplines as well as pastoral experience. CARA researchers are active in the academic community publishing and presenting research about the Catholic Church.

http://cara.georgetown.edu/AboutCARA/aboutCARA.html

[Rainaldo]

Originally Posted by Lancer

CARA

I was hoping to get a little data for free.

[Jegudiel]

This is not the way to collect data for two very important reasons. First, with any study like this you need to control the variables and there are a great many in this case. The speed at which different people present themselves for communion. The speed at which different people are able to distribute communion. The speed at which people can receive communion. The impact of the church's lay-out on queuing, etc. Those are the major ones in addition to the actual process of CIH vs. COT, etc. There are several variables that control each of these minor ones such as some brands of hosts are much, much easier to manipulate than others, how the hosts are placed in the ciboria, etc.

Second, you already have an agenda -- you have a "suspicion" and that would tend to skew any data that you might collect. Even asking here would likely skew the data because there would be more people eager to confirm your suspicion which they share.

You want real numbers? Go buy a big bag of hosts and do your own time study away from the Mass. You could even video it for closer analysis and evidence. You'd better control all the pertinent variables though (list them out as part of your experiment) or people will trample all over your "findings."

[robwar]

Originally Posted by Jegudiel

This is not the way to collect data for two very important reasons. First, with any study like this you need to control the variables and there are a great many in this case. The speed at which different people present themselves for communion. The speed at which different people are able to distribute communion. The speed at which people can receive communion. The impact of the church's lay-out on queuing, etc. Those are the major ones in addition to the actual process of CIH vs. COT, etc. There are several variables that control each of these minor ones such as some brands of hosts are much, much easier to manipulate than others, how the hosts are placed in the ciboria, etc.

Second, you already have an agenda -- you have a "suspicion" and that would tend to skew any data that you might collect. Even asking here would likely skew the data because there would be more people eager to confirm your suspicion which they share.

You want real numbers? Go buy a big bag of hosts and do your own time study away from the Mass. You could even video it for closer analysis and evidence. You'd better control all the pertinent variables though (list them out as part of your experiment) or people will trample all over your "findings."

very good points. The layout of the Church does make a difference. many Churches have a more circular layout with different angles and rows and it would be impractical to have a communion where people go up to kneel to receive because there are too many angles and rows. What is more important is how does it change us not how fast it is.

[Rainaldo]

Originally Posted by Jegudiel

This is not the way to collect data for two very important reasons. First, with any study like this you need to control the variables and there are a great many in this case. The speed at which different people present themselves for communion. The speed at which different people are able to distribute communion. The speed at which people can receive communion. The impact of the church's lay-out on queuing, etc. Those are the major ones in addition to the actual process of CIH vs. COT, etc. There are several variables that control each of these minor ones such as some brands of hosts are much, much easier to manipulate than others, how the hosts are placed in the ciboria, etc.

Second, you already have an agenda -- you have a "suspicion" and that would tend to skew any data that you might collect. Even asking here would likely skew the data because there would be more people eager to confirm your suspicion which they share.

You want real numbers? Go buy a big bag of hosts and do your own time study away from the Mass. You could even video it for closer analysis and evidence. You'd better control all the pertinent variables though (list them out as part of your experiment) or people will trample all over your "findings."

I was going to write you a long response, but instead I'm just going to say you're taking this far too seriously.

[TimothyH]

Originally Posted by Rainaldo

I was hoping to get a little data for free.

We should worry about what effect reception of the Eucharist has on our ability to love our neighbor as ourselves and therefor how pleasing our souls are to God.

Jesus told us that the Eucharist is supernatural.

It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. (John 6:63)

Let me put that in modern terms.

It is the spirit that gives life, while controlled experiments, empirical data, statistical analysis and our own sense of reason and logic are of no avail. (John 6:63)

You can't quantify God.


-Tim-

[Chatter163]

As much as I prefer the EF and dislike the general use of EMHC, I cannot agree that communion is just as fast. With people kneeling at our communion rail, it takes two priests about eleven minutes to disribute to approcimately 175 people. Yesterday we had only one priest and it took him 18 minutes. Most churches that use multiple EMHC and have more communicants seem to run 5-7 minutes, IME.

[Rainaldo]

Originally Posted by TimothyH

You can't quantify God.

Yes you can. One of the reasons EMHCs were created was to shorten communion time. In practice this apparently does not happen.

[Stylites]

Originally Posted by Rainaldo

I have a suspicion that a single priest distributing on the tongue to a congregation kneeling at an altar rail is as efficient as - or is more efficient than - the use of EMHCs.

I've done some field observations at both OF and EF masses and I've tentatively confirmed this to be the case.

Would some of you attending either Form help me out by reporting what you find in your parishes?

So stop our adoration and thanksgiving and move our minds from God to people, and bring along our stopwatches rather than just our good dispositions? I'll leave this whole "efficiency" project to the Bishops who alone have the authority and responsibility for it.

[sacredcow]

Getting back on topic...I myself am uncomfortable about conducting ANY kind of study during Mass; surveys before and after are OK. regarding Extraordinary Ministers, they were initially envisioned for third world countries where you might have thousands of communicants and only one priest, and a hot or cold climate, where people might suffer unduly from long communion times.

[dconklin]

Our parish is rather large and a typical Sunday Mass is 500 people. Easter and Christmas are over 1000.

[Jegudiel]

Originally Posted by sacredcow

Getting back on topic...I myself am uncomfortable about conducting ANY kind of study during Mass; surveys before and after are OK. regarding Extraordinary Ministers, they were initially envisioned for third world countries where you might have thousands of communicants and only one priest, and a hot or cold climate, where people might suffer unduly from long communion times.

You're quite right. You're also not going to get good data.