Blessings during holy communion

[fall_fox]

It is my understanding that EMHC are not to give blessings, as a EMCH myself, I never felt I should be doing that. When I do, I just say, may God bless you, but still it doesn’t seem right. I also understand that the Priest isn’t supposed to do it either, why? If someone has something official on this please put it in here so that I can copy. I’m on the Liturgy Committee, it’s tough getting things changed, their favorite saying is “we’ve always done it that way” I’m only 4 years at this Parish. THANKS

 

[Brendan]

adoremus.org/0209CDW_Blessing.html

1. The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.

"2. Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf. Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; Canon 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).

"3. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands — which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here — by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged.

"4. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, ‘forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry’. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing

“5. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).”.

Although the letter as such is not legally binding, some of its points, such as No. 2 on the prohibition of lay ministers giving liturgical blessings, are merely restatements of existing law and as such are already obligatory.

ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur263.htm

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please read this sticky thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=543513.

 

[fall_fox]

It is my understanding that EMHC are not to give blessings, as a EMCH myself, I never felt I should be doing that. When I do, I just say, may God bless you, but still it doesn’t seem right. I also understand that the Priest isn’t supposed to do it either, why? If someone has something official on this please put it in here so that I can copy. I’m on the Liturgy Committee, it’s tough getting things changed, their favorite saying is “we’ve always done it that way” I’m only 4 years at this Parish. THANKS

Just to make myself clear, I’m talking about people coming up in the Communion line with arms crossed to receive a blessing instead or receiving Holy Communion.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

1. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, ‘forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry’. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing

I don’t get that one…because what about a divorced Catholic who receives an annulment? Either before or after the second marriage? If it is after the second marriage occurs and a convalidation is done…then they would be in good standing…would they not? But the average Joe may not realize that…

 

[Phemie]

1. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, ‘forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry’. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing

I don’t get that one…because what about a divorced Catholic who receives an annulment? Either before or after the second marriage? If it is after the second marriage occurs and a convalidation is done…then they would be in good standing…would they not? But the average Joe may not realize that…

Familiaris Consortio n. 84 refers specifically to those who have divorced and remarried outside the Church, not those who had their marriage declared null and ‘remarried’ validly. You have to read the article, not just the blurb in the letter. It’s too long to post here.

 

[JM3]

Just to make myself clear, I’m talking about people coming up in the Communion line with arms crossed to receive a blessing instead or receiving Holy Communion.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

A) General norms

1. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.

1. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.

1. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html

1. These adaptations consist for the most part in the choice of certain rites or texts, that is, of the chants, readings, prayers, explanations, and gestures which may respond better to the needs, preparation, and culture of the participants and which are entrusted to the priest celebrant., the priest must remember that he is the servant of the sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.

A comment on a Jimmy Akin blog.

jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2006/03/a_reader_writes_1.html

Jimmy,

As a priest, I have had to deal with this question. As you say (and as Fr McNamara of Zenit also says) it is not part of the liturgy and we are not to add or modify rites and rituals of our own accord.
The difficulty I have, taking the above into consideration, is twofold: first, there is a difference between pausing Mass for a plane to go by and pausing Mass to perform a religious action. In the latter case, how is that any different than integrating an extraliturgical modification into Mass? How would one be able to tell the difference between changes and pauses? Is it merely a matter of intent? In that case, why can’t I halt Mass to bless someone’s Rosary, or halt Mass to have a ballet troupe present interpretive religious dance? (It wouldn’t be liturgical dance if we’ve paused the liturgy.) How would this not lead to anarchy if the only criterion is that somebody has to be disaffected for me to justify pausing Mass to insert the action of my choice? That seems a lot different than waiting for a plane to pass overhead before resuming. Silence is inaction, not additional action.

Second, this would seem to be an attempt to “sneak in the back door.” If one person does this, other people will do it, and it will soon become commonplace even though it is not allowed, resulting in multiple “Mass pausings” to distribute blessings. When these parishioners visit other parishes, then their priests will have to deal with the issue. If the Vatican does not in fact legalize this, then there will be some angry laypeople for us to deal with, especially if the Holy See explicitly forbids the practice. It is rarely a good idea to anticipate Vatican actions that have not yet come to be. Speculation remains just that: speculation.

And do we really want to equate the grace of the great Sacrament of Communion with a simple blessing? Wouldn’t it be a better witness to the sanctity of the Sacrament to have to make sacrifices to receive it? I believe (off the top of my head) that then-Cardinal Ratzinger at one point advocated that even those able to receive might want to take an occasional break from the reception of Holy Communion in solidarity with those who cannot receive, and to make sure that we do not begin to take reception for granted.

Thanks for listening to “the other side,” and thanks for all the great work you do for the Church!

God bless!

Posted by: Fr. JP | March 15, 2006 at 07:42 AM

canonlaw.info/2009/05/lay-ministers-of-holy-communion-should.html

Lay ministers of holy Communion (by definition, extraordinary ministers thereof), in response to people approaching them without the intention to receive Communion (maybe such folks are non-Catholics** or are Catholic kids prior to First Communion), currently do one of three things: they (1) speak and gesture a sign of the cross over such folks, or (2) lay hands on such persons’ heads or shoulders while voicing a blessing, or (3) waive the Eucharist over them while purporting to confer a blessing. I think all three actions are liturgical abuses.

 

[Edward_H]

Just to make myself clear, I’m talking about people coming up in the Communion line with arms crossed to receive a blessing instead or receiving Holy Communion.

That’s right,
not authorized.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

That’s right,
not authorized.

Agreed. (1) not authorized to come up for a blessing, (2) not authorized for a lay person to administer a blessing.

One of my pet peeves.

Pax,
OA

 

[Edward_H]

Agreed. (1) not authorized to come up for a blessing, (2) not authorized for a lay person to administer a blessing.

One of my pet peeves.

Pax,
OA

Emhcs also not authorized to purify sacred vessels. Had someone tell me that drying the vessels was not part of purification.

 

[zab]

Emhcs also not authorized to purify sacred vessels. Had someone tell me that drying the vessels was not part of purification.

Washing and drying the vessels is not part of purification.

 

[Edward_H]

Washing and drying the vessels is not part of purification.

GIRM 163 … Upon returning to the altar, the priest collects any fragments that may remain. Then, standing at the altar or at the credence table, he purifies the paten or ciborium over the chalice then purifies the chalice, saying quietly,Quod ore sumpsimus(Lord, may I receive), and dries the chalice with a purificator. If the vessels are purified at the altar, they are carried to the credence table by a minister. Nevertheless, it is also permitted, especially if there are several vessels to be purified, to leave them suitably covered on a corporal, either at the altar or at the credence table, and to purify them immediately after Mass following the dismissal of the people.

 

[Phemie]

Washing & drying and purifying & drying are two different things.

 

[Edward_H]

Washing & drying and purifying & drying are two different things.

The abuse we have in our parish is that the emhcs at the credence table are using PURIFIcators immediately after water is doused by the priest onto the sacred vessels. This drying act is part and parcel of the PURIFIcation process.

 

[Edward_H]

If you’re using PURIFIcators on the altar you’re purifying.

 

[zab]

Emhcs also not authorized to purify sacred vessels. Had someone tell me that drying the vessels was not part of purification.

If you’re using PURIFIcators on the altar you’re purifying.

Well in that case, you are correct.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

Interestingly, in the appendix to the Archdiocese of the Military Services Priests’ Manual I found a letter, which I’ll quote for your consideration:

(Congregatio Culto Divino Et Disciplina Sacramentorum, Serial Prot. n. 468/05/L dated in Rome, 12 October 2006)

Your Excellency,
I refer to your letters of 9 March 2005 and 7 March 2006, in which, in the name of the Conference of Bishops of which you are President, you requested a renewal of the indult for extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion to purify the sacred vessels after Mass, where there are not enough priests or deacons to purify a large number of chalices that might be used at Mass.

I have put the whole matter before the Holy Father in an audience which he granted me on 9 June 2006, and received instructions to reply as follows:

1. …

1. Paraphraph 279 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal directs that the sacred vessels are to be purified by the priest, the deacon or an instituted acolyte. The status of this text as legislation has recently been clarified by the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts. It does not seem feasible, therefore, for the Congregation to grant the requested indult from this directive in the general law of the Latin Church.

1. This letter is therefore a request to the members of the Bishops’ Conference of the United Status [sic] of America to prepare the necessary explanations and catechetical materials for your clergy and people so that henceforth the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 279, as found in the *editio typicatia *of the Roman Missal, will be observed throught its territories.

. . . .

Devotedly yours in Christ,
Francis Cardinal Arinze

I’ve also found a few different sources that indicate that a lay person is not permitted the handle the sacred vessels without permission of a priest or deacon, but the sources are old and I don’t have the time to look for the current practice.

Pax,
OA

 

[Edward_H]

The renewal of the indult was not granted by the Vatican. The usccb had requested it and it was denied.

Search for catholic news service for the story

 

[DarrenOglesby]

Thanks for bringing this up. I didn’t know about this. I myself am a EMHC, and at my parish we were told to bless people that come up with the arms crossed. Never had an adult come up. Just kids, so I just tapped their heads with my hand. It’s not really doing anything because I am a lay person. Also we were told to drink reverently the precious blood in the sacristy after everyone had came up for communion. It really disturbs me when the other person say’s “There’s nothing like a glass of wine on Sunday.” After we consume the precious blood we are suppose to swish tap water around in the chalice and consume it, then we dry them and put it in the cabinet.

I believe there needs to be some reform at my parish. I try to do everything as reverently as I can, but the other’s I am not so sure about.

I am currently in the process of applying to seminary, and If I ever get ordained God Willingly, I would bring back the altar rails and have 1 emhc.

I also heard some things today at choir practice, our organist isn’t Catholic, and she said she does not take communion, but one time a member of the choir broke a host and brought it up to her. I don’t know this member, but I do know she is no longer Catholic.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

Thanks for bringing this up. I didn’t know about this. I myself am a EMHC, and at my parish we were told to bless people that come up with the arms crossed. Never had an adult come up. Just kids, so I just tapped their heads with my hand. It’s not really doing anything because I am a lay person. Also we were told to drink reverently the precious blood in the sacristy after everyone had came up for communion. It really disturbs me when the other person say’s “There’s nothing like a glass of wine on Sunday.” After we consume the precious blood we are suppose to swish tap water around in the chalice and consume it, then we dry them and put it in the cabinet.

I believe there needs to be some reform at my parish. I try to do everything as reverently as I can, but the other’s I am not so sure about.

I am currently in the process of applying to seminary, and If I ever get ordained God Willingly, I would bring back the altar rails and have 1 emhc.

I also heard some things today at choir practice, our organist isn’t Catholic, and she said she does not take communion, but one time a member of the choir broke a host and brought it up to her. I don’t know this member, but I do know she is no longer Catholic.

You should talk to your priest - seems like this thread has indicated a few good talking points. If he brushes you off, which happens too often as I perceive it, ask him what other aspects of the ritual can be ignored . . . you know, just so you’re clear on what is a mandatory rule and what is an optional rule.

Pax,
OA