www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Giving blessings?

May I bank that until the 28th please ?




us Julian Calendar folk have our simple bits of fun from time to time

I agree completely. But once a practice like this has become established, people have got used to it and have come to expect it. How, then, does one go about getting rid of the practice again? Certainly it is not something one individual extraordinary minister of holy communion can change on his own.

Oh it can be stopped .

There's plenty of documentation about it.

The snag is that there are many priests who decide on a practice like this and say they do so on grounds of 'pastoral sensitivity'

The younger priests don't do it , the older ones don't . The ones who do are those who were in Seminary in the 70s - the ' I'll do it my way ' ones.

It can be stopped quite easily - announcements in the Parish bulletins , on Parish Websites and from the pulpit. EHMCs can be instructed not to do anything that sounds like a blessing or looks like it.

Having said all that - will it ?

OOPS, I am sorry! I am not meaning to be insensitive--just forgot.

Now it occurs to me to wonder: what about deacons? They are ordained, but not presbyters.

And is the answer different for east and west?

hawk

Never better!! In fact, I think that's why I seem to be able to sleep through almost any kind of noise inside or outside the house.
BOB

Well, isn't there really a pastoral consideration to be given here under the idea of economy?

I think that the problem that I see is that the practice varies from parish to parish. I also think that the parishes that do this are well intentioned and are not meaning to do this in bad faith to the Church.

However, there is an issue of sensitivity involved in which a person may come up to receive a blessing and then be in the awkward situation of being turned away.

For those who are not Catholic, who don't understand this, it may be interpreted in a way that communicates an uninterested or uncaring Church. When considered in this way, I think that economy can be regarded in this situation so that the person approaching for a blessing feels welcomed, instead of the possibility of being turned away. I think that a blessing, even if not quite proper, would go farther to bring that person into the Church, than turning them away would.

Any thoughts?

I understand what you are getting at - but the fact remains that this practice should never have started , and of course now it has , it's even more difficult to deal with it.

I have more sympathy when it's the Priest who is conferring the blessing on someone , but a lay person who is an Extra Ordinary Minister of Holy Communion has no authority to bless anyone [ other than as we have mentioned earlier - their own children/family , and indeed that blessing is not a formal Blessing of the Church but an act of love ]

I really don't know the answer , but the longer the practice goes on the harder it is to put an end to it.

Hi,

Regarding blessings in general, the Latin rite does provide quasi-liturgical forms for blessings that may be "presided" by lay people, using the appropriate formulas. See the "Book of Blessings".

There are some blessings reseved to the ordained (deacons, presbyters and bishops), some reserved to the ordained to the priesthood (presbyters and bishops) and some reserved to the bishop.

Non-Liturgical blessings are part of the Catholic folklore of many cultures, not only within a family circle, but also in religious associations of every kind and, as was mentioned earlier, even when we sneeze.

And yes, these all stem from the Royal Prieshood shared by all the baptized.

Regarding the blessing given to those who are unable to receive Holy Communion, I suggest you consult with your local parish and diocese.

The language from the CDW that the practice "should be discouraged" means that the practice is frowned upon by Rome, but they would not get into a fight with the Local Ordinary, should he decide to allow it within his jurisdiction.

Here in L.A., these blessings are business as usual for both the ordained and the extraordinary lay ministers.

Shalom,
Memo

I don't know - I suspect we are not reading the same document , or alternatively I just don't understand what I read.

I quote from my original link

I was commenting on items 3 and 5 on your quote.

The practice of laying on of hands in substitution of Holy Communion is to be discouraged (but no more than that).

Those who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion should not approach (however, if they do.... then what?).

Considering that this is Roman-style law, this language is vague enough to consider it more a guideline than a hard norm.

That, of course, on top of the opening paragraph, which clearly states that Rome is still making up her mind about this whole thing (which almost guarantees they will not coax Local Ordinaries to stop the practice, since those jurisdictions will actually provide the pastoral feedback Rome needs to make up her mind about the issue).

So, again, for the best possible answer to the question about what to do when you are an EMHC, consult your parochial and diocesan guidelines. And let your diocesan authorities figure it out with Rome.

Shalom,
Memo

To which this latin Rite Catholic would say, why does Rome need to get involved with something that is well within the authority of the Bishop in his diocese?
I say this recognizing that the American latin Rite Bishops' aren't exactly known for holding the line on the tradition of the Church, but seem to be rather progressive about too many things.

I also agree that once the camel's nose is through the tent, it's hard to wade through all of this.

it's not an easy thing for those of us who are catechists in our parish b/c this is a real issue. The farther up the ladder toward Rome this gets, the more esoteric it seems to the vast majority of people.

That's why I was asking for some theology on this.

From WDTPRS Blog, Fr. Z



Traditionally Speaking by S. Casarotto 8/9/09

NO BLESSING

A growing phenomenon in the “liturgical renewal” is giving a blessing to the faithful who have joined the Communion procession at Mass with no intention of receiving the Eucharist. They ask for a blessing as they fold their arms across their chest to receive it. I do not give this blessing and for many reasons:

1) There is already a blessing to the whole congregation at the end of the mass and I am always available to give a special blessing to those who request it for some special reasons (before going to the hospital, for an anniversary, before taking a long trip, etc.);

2) A blessing at Communion time creates confusion and is a countersign about the purpose of the Communion procession;

3) It is disrespectful to turn the attention from the Eucharist to a person to be blessed. This innovation is nowhere to be found in the instructions for the celebration of the mass. In fact, the Holy See has said many times, “Enough with experimentation” and “Nothing is to be added or taken away from the liturgy” which is “the prayer of Christ and of the Church.” I suspect that this custom started when, as a reaction to a Jansenistic understanding of spiritual worthiness for the Sacraments, well intentioned priests and liturgical committee began to urge the faithful to receive the Eucharist. Everyone, Catholic and non-Catholic, whether in a state of grace or not, came to believe they must join the Communion line. This thinking has been introduced by the false interpretation of “active participation”....

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/08/why-a-priest-wont-give-communion-blessings/

Well,

Here are a few reasons why I like to have the blessings:

1. The main objection is alleged confusion among the people about what is going on. However, I think that the vast majority of people attending liturgies in which blessings are given during communion will be smart enough that this blessing is NOT in conflict with the blessing at the end of the liturgy.

2. Likewise, there is a visible substantial difference between receiving Holy Communion and receiving a blessing. No confusion here either.

3. It acknowledges that all people are ultimately called to the Table of the Lord. Not everyone is able to receive, but everybody is called to get there. Having everybody process is a good symbol for that. Wherever people are in their process of coming back to the Lord, they are actually also processing back to the Table of the Lord.

4. What lay people cannot do is to impart public solemn blessings, but this is an individual blessing, which is legitimate by virtue of our Baptism.

5. The Lord did not reject anyone from His Table. Judas himself was there. To ask people who are not able to receive Holy Communion not to even approach the Table is, in my opinion, contrary to The Lord's praxis.

So, again, do not go against your parochial and diocesan regulations. It is not worth it.

There are enough things that are truly wrong going on in many places. Pick your battles wisely. This one is not worth fighting, even if you're right.

God Bless! (even if you are not able to receive Holy Communion at this time)

Shalom,
Memo

The Fathers were very concerned that people were attending the Eucharistic Liturgy and not receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. They preached repeatedly against what they considered a serious abuse, and their message was consistent: if you cannot or will not receive, then you should leave the church after the Liturgy of the Word is completed. At the time, there were orders of penitents who, together with the catechumens, were sent out of the church at the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and the doors closed. In the minds of the Fathers, the reason for attending the Liturgy of the Eucharist was to receive, not merely to watch or to receive a blessing, because the Eucharist was an ecclesial action, not a source of personal sanctification.