Blessing during communion

[Ed_Rand]

So then, Ed, you are advocating that we completely disregard what the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has reiterated and just enjoy the Mass? The Mass is not some free form exercise in creativity.

Not at all. I think people should follow your advice if they feel moved by your arguments. On the other hand, some priests encourage this practice and those who wish to do this should do it. In essence, what I’m advocating is that people not take you so seriously. I’m advocating that people follow the norms of their parish and not go on some Crusade as if extra blessings will somehow ruin the mass.

The parental blessing that you speak of is vastly different. I am from Laredo, just across the Rio Grande from Mexco and the parental blessings that I have seen do not occur within the context of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Rather than mimic the priest, the parents that you describe should use this as a teaching moment and instruct their children on how to do the sign of the Cross.

I imagine your “shoulds” regarding the mass are very plentiful. I already said that I believe you are probably right in that this practice may be frowned upon in official circles. Nonetheless, my priest was a canon lawyer and he enjoys blessing the children. In all seriousness benedictgal, I thank God that your attitude is not the dominant one in the Church. I just ask you to lighten up a bit, that’s all. The rules of the mass should not be the focus.

 

[benedictgal]

Not at all. I think people should follow your advice if they feel moved by your arguments. On the other hand, some priests encourage this practice and those who wish to do this should do it. In essence, what I’m advocating is that people not take you so seriously. I’m advocating that people follow the norms of their parish and not go on some Crusade as if extra blessings will somehow ruin the mass.

I imagine your “shoulds” regarding the mass are very plentiful. I already said that I believe you are probably right in that this practice may be frowned upon in official circles. Nonetheless, my priest was a canon lawyer and he enjoys blessing the children. In all seriousness benedictgal, I thank God that your attitude is not the dominant one in the Church. I just ask you to lighten up a bit, that’s all. The rules of the mass should not be the focus.

However, Ed, with all due respect, it’s attitudes like yours towards the Mass that are cause for concern. It is not about enjoying blessing children, it is about following what the Church states, something that you seem to think is optional.

No one, not even the celebrant, has the right to add anything to the Mass. This is, as I read your posts, something that you are advocating.

Please read this section from Redemptionis Sacramentum:

[7.] Not infrequently, abuses are rooted in a false understanding of liberty. Yet God has not granted us in Christ an illusory liberty by which we may do what we wish, but a liberty by which we may do that which is fitting and right.18 This is true not only of precepts coming directly from God, but also of laws promulgated by the Church, with appropriate regard for the nature of each norm. For this reason, all should conform to the ordinances set forth by legitimate ecclesiastical authority

It is sad that you seem to not regard the “formalities” of the Mass as something important. Evidently, the Church sees these as very important. These safeguard the integrity of the Mass.

 

[FAB]

However, Ed, with all due respect, it’s attitudes like yours towards the Mass that are cause for concern. It is not about enjoying blessing children, it is about following what the Church states, something that you seem to think is optional.

No one, not even the celebrant, has the right to add anything to the Mass. This is, as I read your posts, something that you are advocating.

Please read this section from Redemptionis Sacramentum:

It is sad that you seem to not regard the “formalities” of the Mass as something important. Evidently, the Church sees these as very important. These safeguard the integrity of the Mass.

Being overly scrupulous to the law is what lead to the reforms of Vatican II. If the Church turns back to type if ridgid conformity, it will not beifit the integrity of the Mass or the Church. Looking at only the strick conformity of the law and not the pastoral needs of the people is being short sighted.
At some point preist saw a need and an opportunity and began doing the blessings. They saw were the law was not meeting the need and acted accordenly, this is not an abuse, this is proper pastoral action. the reason why the bishops are our primary teachers and not Rome is that are more capable of reponding to such needs and more readily realize the benifits.
Quote all the laws you want, if they do not serve the people of God, they are not worth much.
Peace,
FAB

 

[Heavens_Flowers]

Mass is theCELEBRATION of Christ not a sacrifice on Sunday. And I mentioned several times that my own children get blessed. Just because you keep posting the same letter over and over again(that no one else can even find) doesn’t make you correct. You have repeatedly insulted our priest in these posts and I must say that is very unnecessary and rude. And it was an interesting topic but you have taken it to another level. This matter truly is not one of importance. The priest should deal with this according to the bishops feeling.

 

[benedictgal]

Being overly scrupulous to the law is what lead to the reforms of Vatican II. If the Church turns back to type if ridgid conformity, it will not beifit the integrity of the Mass or the Church. Looking at only the strick conformity of the law and not the pastoral needs of the people is being short sighted.
At some point preist saw a need and an opportunity and began doing the blessings. They saw were the law was not meeting the need and acted accordenly, this is not an abuse, this is proper pastoral action. the reason why the bishops are our primary teachers and not Rome is that are more capable of reponding to such needs and more readily realize the benifits.
Quote all the laws you want, if they do not serve the people of God, they are not worth much.
Peace,
FAB

But, FAB, neither does willfull ignorance of these norms. This causes the people of God more harm than good because:

[7.] Not infrequently, abuses are rooted in a false understanding of liberty. Yet God has not granted us in Christ an illusory liberty by which we may do what we wish, but a liberty by which we may do that which is fitting and right.18 This is true not only of precepts coming directly from God, but also of laws promulgated by the Church, with appropriate regard for the nature of each norm. For this reason, all should conform to the ordinances set forth by legitimate ecclesiastical authority

What you are stating is that false sense of liberty that RS warns against, whether you choose to admit this or not. As I have said repeatedly in this thread, many bad innovations happened because of so-called “pastoral” decisions.

FAB, you are treading on some slippery ground here. What you are demonstrating to me is the kind of misunderstanding of the Second Vatican Council that Pope Benedict XVI warned against. Rather than looking at the documents of the Council, you seem to be only paying attention to the alleged Spirit.

Whoever came up with this well-meaning, but, misguided act did not have the authority to insert these blessings into the Mass. This violates the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy. Your persistence in maintaining a stand that contradicts what the CDWDS has already stated is most concerning. These blessings are not up to the celebrant to impart, be he a priest, bishop or cardinal.

Again, look at the citations that the CDWDS used in its observations. These are current liturgical and canonical laws. This is what is in force today and what has been in force for quite some time. Why do you choose to ignore them and advocate something that clearly should not be done?

 

[Ed_Rand]

It is sad that you seem to not regard the “formalities” of the Mass as something important.

They are important. I never said they were not. But this issue is nowhere near as important as you would have it. That is what I have been saying.

When people, especially laypeople, attempt to force everyone into their own rigid forms of celebration, I become suspicious of what is really important to that person. For instance, if I had someone like you in my Church causing a stink about all these little things and trying to bring everyone into their own version of conformity, I would question their motives. I would feel that this person is using the authority of the Church to stoke their own pride.

Being on the internet trying to inform people is a bit different. But I would say you have an unhealthy attraction to this issue. Sorry if I offend, but this is how I feel. I think many others feel the same. You should think on this.

 

[benedictgal]

Mass is theCELEBRATION of Christ not a sacrifice on Sunday. And I mentioned several times that my own children get blessed. Just because you keep posting the same letter over and over again(that no one else can even find) doesn’t make you correct. You have repeatedly insulted our priest in these posts and I must say that is very unnecessary and rude. And it was an interesting topic but you have taken it to another level. This matter truly is not one of importance. The priest should deal with this according to the bishops feeling.

The Mass is first and foremost the Sacrifice. To say that it is not is to completely misunderstand the nature of this sacred liturgy. While it is a celebration, we witness the Sacrifice of Jesus at Calvary. The veil between heaven and earth and time and space is lifted. We are just as much a part of the Sacrifice as were the Blessed Mother and Sts. John and Mary Magdalene.

The fact that you choose to ignore what the Apostolic See has stated in many documents is of great concern. It is also not a matter of what the bishop’s feeling is, Heavenly Flowers. The Church does not operate on feelings. This matter is not up to the bishop to decide. While the bishop enjoys some authority over the Mass, it is not complete authority; that is reserved only to the Holy Father and, as he delegates it, to the appropriate department of the Apostolic See, namely, the CDWDS.

 

[benedictgal]

They are important. I never said they were not. But this issue is nowhere near as important as you would have it. That is what I have been saying.

When people, especially laypeople, attempt to force everyone into their own rigid forms of celebration, I become suspicious of what is really important to that person. For instance, if I had someone like you in my Church causing a stink about all these little things and trying to bring everyone into their own version of conformity, I would question their motives. I would feel that this person is using the authority of the Church to stoke their own pride.

Being on the internet trying to inform people is a bit different. But I would say you have an unhealthy attraction to this issue. Sorry if I offend, but this is how I feel. I think many others feel the same. You should think on this.

Ed, there is no need to be insulting. The issue is important, regardless of how you choose to see it or your deflection of the question.

What is unhealthy is the fact that innovations are introduced that have no business being inserted into the Mass. This is wrong. This does damage to the Church because it ruptures the unity of the Sacred liturgy. What is just as unhealthy is the fact that there are people who will defend these kind of practices and accuse others who are trying to state the norms of the Church as being rigid.

The norms and rubrics of the Church exist for a reason. None of us has the right to introduce anything into the Mass on our own authority. Unfortunately, there are those who cannot see that, nor do they want to see that. The Church is trying to reign in on several years of experimentation, but, there are those who would rather treat the Mass as their own property and do with it as they wish. When someone speaks out against such activity, they are insulted.

 

[FAB]

But, FAB, neither does willfull ignorance of these norms. This causes the people of God more harm than good because:

What you are stating is that false sense of liberty that RS warns against, whether you choose to admit this or not. As I have said repeatedly in this thread, many bad innovations happened because of so-called “pastoral” decisions.

FAB, you are treading on some slippery ground here. What you are demonstrating to me is the kind of misunderstanding of the Second Vatican Council that Pope Benedict XVI warned against. Rather than looking at the documents of the Council, you seem to be only paying attention to the alleged Spirit.

Whoever came up with this well-meaning, but, misguided act did not have the authority to insert these blessings into the Mass. This violates the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy. Your persistence in maintaining a stand that contradicts what the CDWDS has already stated is most concerning. These blessings are not up to the celebrant to impart, be he a priest, bishop or cardinal.

Again, look at the citations that the CDWDS used in its observations. These are current liturgical and canonical laws. This is what is in force today and what has been in force for quite some time. Why do you choose to ignore them and advocate something that clearly should not be done?

My insistance has been to follow the direction and teaching one’s ordinary as our primary teacher of morals, theology and Church law. At this point that is what I am followiing.
Your continual effort to diminish the authority of the bishops, is much more disturbing and detramental to the Church than a few blessings at communion.
“let the children come to me” JC

Peace,
FAB

 

[zab]

catholic.com/library/Sacrifice_of_the_Mass.asp
To HeavensFlowers: The Mass is always a sacrifice.

I can see that this discussion is doing more harm than good.

 

[Ed_Rand]

Ed, there is no need to be insulting. The issue is important, regardless of how you choose to see it or your deflection of the question.

What is unhealthy is the fact that innovations are introduced that have no business being inserted into the Mass. This is wrong. This does damage to the Church because it ruptures the unity of the Sacred liturgy. What is just as unhealthy is the fact that there are people who will defend these kind of practices and accuse others who are trying to state the norms of the Church as being rigid.

The norms and rubrics of the Church exist for a reason. None of us has the right to introduce anything into the Mass on our own authority. Unfortunately, there are those who cannot see that, nor do they want to see that. The Church is trying to reign in on several years of experimentation, but, there are those who would rather treat the Mass as their own property and do with it as they wish. When someone speaks out against such activity, they are insulted.

There is nothing insulting about what I said. I gave you my honest opinion just like you have given me yours. I think you have an unhealthy attraction to this rule and probably mass rules in general. I’m not saying this to insult you. I’m also concerned about certain aspects of the certain practices that I feel hinder the solemnity of the service. I’m just trying to help you.

Remeber that Jesus also did some things that would have made the religious authorities livid. His turning of ceremonial water into 150 gallons of wine comes to mind.

 

[benedictgal]

My insistance has been to follow the direction and teaching one’s ordinary as our primary teacher of morals, theology and Church law. At this point that is what I am followiing.
Your continual effort to diminish the authority of the bishops, is much more disturbing and detramental to the Church than a few blessings at communion.
“let the children come to me” JC

Peace,
FAB

According to Redemptionis Sacramentum and the Sacrosanctum Concilium, the primary regulator of the Liturgy is the Apostolic See. It is then followed by the bishop. Even at that point, as the section from the GIRM I quoted indicates, the bishop does not have complete authority. There are limitations to the scope of what he can do and this is not a diminishing of the bishop’s authorty. This is something that you still have not recognized. Furthermore, the authority of the bishop is derived from Rome, not the other way around. The bishop is just as much bound to obedience to the Apostolic See as we are to the bishop.

Again, the CDWDS, using existing liturgical and canonical law, has already indicated that these blessings should not be done. You fail to see that point.

FAB, when this issue came up two years ago, you told me that I was wrong. The funny thing is that I wound up quoting a couple of the same documents that the CDWDS quoted in its observations. Despite the fact that I was vindicated, you still do not get the point and persist in disregarding what the Congregation has to say. You also seem to discount the fact that the CDWDS has provided citations to what it said. While you state that you do not, your words give a completely different message.

 

[benedictgal]

There is nothing insulting about what I said. I gave you my honest opinion just like you have given me yours. I think you have an unhealthy attraction to this rule and probably mass rules in general. I’m not saying this to insult you. I’m also concerned about certain aspects of the certain practices that I feel hinder the solemnity of the service. I’m just trying to help you.

Remeber that Jesus also did some things that would have made the religious authorities livid. His turning of ceremonial water into 150 gallons of wine comes to mind.

Ed, if you are going to refute me, please get your scriptural references correct. Jesus’ miracle at the Wedding of Cana had nothing to do with the Pharisees. Rather, it was done at the request of the Blessed Mother.

Furthermore, Jesus’ debates with the Pharisees had absolutely nothing to do with the cultic sacrificial worship at the Temple. In fact, Jesus vehemently defended the integrity of Temple worship. After all, His own Father dictated the norms for this kind of worshp to prefigure the Sacrifice of Calvary that the True Lamb of God was going to make Recall that he cast out the moneychangers and animal vendors who were profaning the sacred space of the courtyard of the Gentiles, a space of prayers for the non-Jewish people.

The problem is that these kind of practices cause more harm than good and folks routinely look the other way in the name of pastoral concerns, thuse allowing these abuses to continue. At some point, this has to stop. Not only are these practices abusive, but, they cause confusion among the faithful, like what is happening right now in this thread.

 

[Heavens_Flowers]

catholic.com/library/Sacrifice_of_the_Mass.asp
To HeavensFlowers: The Mass is always a sacrifice.

I can see that this discussion is doing more harm than good.

you are right sacrife was a poor choice of word on my part. I was simply trying to express that mass can be fun and exciting it doesn’t have to be the way bedi keeps trying to make it out to be. He’s completely obsessed with a very minor. God loves his children. He wants us to enjoy being with him. Thank you zab for correcting my choice of words.

 

[Ed_Rand]

Ed, if you are going to refute me, please get your scriptural references correct. Jesus’ miracle at the Wedding of Cana had nothing to do with the Pharisees. Rather, it was done at the request of the Blessed Mother.

My reference was perfectly correct. What do you think the Pharisees would have said if they saw what he did with the ceremonial water? Do you see? His gathering of grain on the Sabbath? His curing on the Sabbath? This is what I was getting at. You should try listening a bit. I think my efforts are in vain. I just hope that you’re not pressuring people in your parish and spreading this attitude.

 

[benedictgal]

you are right sacrife was a poor choice of word on my part. I was simply trying to express that mass can be fun and exciting it doesn’t have to be the way bedi keeps trying to make it out to be. He’s completely obsessed with a very minor. God loves his children. He wants us to enjoy being with him. Thank you zab for correcting my choice of words.

I am not a man and this is not a minor issue. It is a shame that those who support this fail to see that when we add things to the Mass that we have no authority to do, confusion ensues. This is exacatly what is happening here.

Regarding the sacrificial aspect of the Mass, please note what Redemptionis Sacramentum has to say:

[38.] The constant teaching of the Church on the nature of the Eucharist not only as a meal, but also and pre-eminently as a Sacrifice, is therefore rightly understood to be one of the principal keys to the full participation of all the faithful in so great a Sacrament.97 For when “stripped of its sacrificial meaning, the mystery is understood as if its meaning and importance were simply that of a fraternal banquet”.98

What I have seen in this thread is a dangerous trend. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments states five good reasons, quoting the pertinent liturgical and canonical laws, as to why these blessings should not be happening and people choose to ignore them and offer insults to those of us who are trying to explain them. Rather than read what the CDWDS has stated, people still succumb to the alleged Spirit of Vatican II and adopt an anything goes, “it’s not hurting anything” attitude. This is a very dangerous thing to have. As I see it, when we adopt this kind of attitude, we are sinking into the kind of relativism that Pope Benedict warned against when he stated that we are faced with a dictatorship of relativism. Those of us who speak out against this are called unhealthy and rigid. That is certainly not a good thing.

 

[benedictgal]

My reference was perfectly correct. What do you think the Pharisees would have said if they saw what he did with the ceremonial water? Do you see? His gathering of grain on the Sabbath? His curing on the Sabbath? This is what I was getting at. You should try listening a bit. I think my efforts are in vain. I just hope that you’re not pressuring people in your parish and spreading this attitude.

Ed, again, your references are incorrect. As I see it, you still do not understand the issue with the Pharisees. For you to keep leveling insults instead of actually making an effort at reading the documents is deflection.

Jesus’ issue with the Pharisees had nothing, virtually nothing to do with the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel. The Pharisees were an entirely different problem, Ed. As I see it, those of you who support these blessings are acting more along the lines of the Pharisees because you are trying to go beyond what the liturgical norms of the Church permit. The Pharisees were trying to impose priestly rituals on the faithful. That is what Jesus was rallying against.

At least in a few parishes down here, the blessings have stopped because the priests have read the statement and the referenced documents. A few of them welcomed the document because they stated that they had issues with these blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion.

 

[Ed_Rand]

Ed, again, your references are incorrect. As I see it, you still do not understand the issue with the Pharisees. For you to keep leveling insults instead of actually making an effort at reading the documents is deflection.

Jesus’ issue with the Pharisees had nothing, virtually nothing to do with the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel. The Pharisees were an entirely different problem, Ed. As I see it, those of you who support these blessings are acting more along the lines of the Pharisees because you are trying to go beyond what the liturgical norms of the Church permit. The Pharisees were trying to impose priestly rituals on the faithful. That is what Jesus was rallying against.

Sorry, but you are absolutely wrong about the pharisees. Wow. The pharisees were obsessed with rules and laws but they didn’t have love. That’s why he called them whitewashed tombs. They wanted Jesus’ bones broken so they could be clean to celebrate the Passover. “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” They followed the law to the letter but they didn’t understand it’s spirit. Wow. I really don’t know what to say about this. Go back and read about the Pharisees. You’re really quite off.

At least in a few parishes down here, the blessings have stopped because the priests have read the statement and the referenced documents. A few of them welcomed the document because they stated that they had issues with these blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion

And these parishioners should follow their priests without question.

 

[thistle]

you are right sacrife was a poor choice of word on my part. I was simply trying to express that mass can be **fun and exciting **it doesn’t have to be the way bedi keeps trying to make it out to be. He’s completely obsessed with a very minor. God loves his children. He wants us to enjoy being with him. Thank you zab for correcting my choice of words.

Bad choice of words. The Mass is a solemn occasion and not entertainment.

I am in full agreement with everything Benedictgal has posted.

It seems to me that some of the posters here would like Mass to become like a Protestant service.

 

[FAB]

Ed, again, your references are incorrect. As I see it, you still do not understand the issue with the Pharisees. For you to keep leveling insults instead of actually making an effort at reading the documents is deflection.

Jesus’ issue with the Pharisees had nothing, virtually nothing to do with the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel. The Pharisees were an entirely different problem, Ed. As I see it, those of you who support these blessings are acting more along the lines of the Pharisees because you are trying to go beyond what the liturgical norms of the Church permit. The Pharisees were trying to impose priestly rituals on the faithful. That is what Jesus was rallying against.

At least in a few parishes down here, the blessings have stopped because the priests have read the statement and the referenced documents. A few of them welcomed the document because they stated that they had issues with these blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion.

I believe ED’s point and mine is the over stressing and following of rules over what I or he might condider a good pastoral practice, not particularly sacraficial worship.

Peace,
FAB