Our parish is having Adoration one day per week for the duration of the 40 Days for Life. I was present for the last hour of the evening. When our priest came out of the Sacristy, we all knelt, as did he. He then walked behind the altar facing us and prior to removing the luna, he held the monstrance bare handed while it still contained the Blessed Sacrament and blessed us with the monstrance but without putting on or using a humeral veil.
Is that proper?
The rubrics can be found in the document Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass (Roman Ritual, The Rites, vol. 1):
- The ordinary minister for exposition of the Eucharist is a priest or deacon. At the end of the period of adoration, before the reposition, he blesses the congregation with the sacrament.
In the absence of a priest or deacon or if they are lawfully impeded, an acolyte, another [extraordinary] minister of communion, or another person appointed by the local Ordinary may publicly expose and later repose the Eucharist for the adoration of the faithful.
Such ministers may open the tabernacle and also, as required, place the ciborium on the altar or place the host in the monstrance. At the end of the period of adoration, they replace the blessed sacrament in the tabernacle. It is not lawful, however, for them to give the blessing with the sacrament.
- The minister, if he is a priest or deacon, should vest in an alb, or a surplice over a cassock, and a stole. Other ministers should wear either the liturgical vestments that are used in the region or the vesture that is befitting this ministry and is approved by the Ordinary.
The priest or deacon should wear a white cope and humeral veil to give the blessing at the end of adoration, when the exposition takes place with the monstrance. In the case or exposition in the ciborium, he should put on the humeral veil.
= = =
So, the priest should wear a white cope and humeral veil.
It is possible there was a reason for the absence of the correct vestments, including their unavailability for some reason, a lack of time for vesting due to some circumstance, and so on.
Unless this becomes habitual with this priest or this parish, I would consider it a minor rubrical gaffe and not worth pursuing. Of course if it becomes de riguer the ordinary approach of inquiry with the priest, followed by contact with the bishop if necessary, all with due respect for authority is the proper response.
.