Crossing your arms at Communion

[JimG]

In our EMHC meetings our Priest would dicuss this. He told us that we were not to touch the person or say “I bless you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirt.” We were to just say “May the Lord bless you and kept you.”

No one anticipated that EMHC’s would become Extraordinary Ministers of Blessings.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

No one anticipated that EMHC’s would become Extraordinary Ministers of Blessings.

Actually, I would not say that at all. In fact, quite the opposite given what the Council Fathers mandated in Sacrosanctum Concilium.
*79. The sacramentals are to undergo a revision which takes into account the primary principle of enabling the faithful to participate intelligently, actively, and easily; the circumstances of our own days must also be considered. When rituals are revised, as laid down in Art. 63, new sacramentals may also be added as the need for these becomes apparent.

Reserved blessings shall be very few; reservations shall be in favor of bishops or ordinaries.

Let provision be made that some sacramentals, at least in special circumstances and at the discretion of the ordinary, may be administered by qualified lay persons.*
More than simply invoking God’s blessing in a few words, the Council Fathers envisioned that certain laity in the future would be entrusted even with administering sacramentals…which is why the revised Book of Blessings makes provisions for sacramentals that can be conferred by the hands of lay people as well as Orders of Blessing at which a lay person can preside in the absence of an ordained minister.

 

[Vico]

This I never realized as a convert but have heard a bit with disagreement . Is it legally( canon law) something very wrong to do or just not addressed? All I can say is that after becoming Catholic it meant SO much to my husbad( no catholic) to decieved the blessing. He eventually became Catholic. He told me this blessing was so special from the priest( he always made sure it was the priest he approached in the correct line) Also… It makes it easier for those It is helpful for Catholics who might feel they need confession to be able to proceed up but not receive rather than sit and not to go up as just the Blessing will help them before getting to Confession but I don’t canon law and will abide by canon law of the Church in obedience. I only am expressing my opinion and wondering the official rules…
mlz

Everyone gets a blessing at the end of the Mass: (Priest) May almighty God bless you, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 

[paperwight66]

Everyone gets a blessing at the end of the Mass: (Priest) May almighty God bless you, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Yes, of course. This fact really doesn’t need repeating every time we discuss blessings.

But if we are serious about wanting to encourage others to become Catholics, shouldn’t we at least do them the courtesy of actually LlSTENING to them? They tell us that receiving a blessing in the line has tremendous meaning and impact, and can lead them to ask to become Catholic.

How does it hurt the rest of us who do receive Holy Communion if the person in front of us receives a personal gesture of welcome? It doesn’t diminish what WE have received, surely?

The Apostle Paul wrote about being all things to all people, and to take into account others’ feelings.

I really feel that sometimes we Catholics have an awfully niggardly attitude. We should be going out into the highways and byways to invite others to the wedding feast., and at the very least, welcoming those who come in.

As I said, how does seeing others come forward with us, diminish what we receive? Personally, it makes me rejoice that perhaps someone is taking the first steps, and even, maybe, will end up a great saint.

 

[JimG]

Receiving a blessing at communion does not, of course, diminish holy communion. It does, though, change the communion line into a dual purpose liturgical rite: a communion line, plus a blessing line. I wonder if any thought was given to this liturgical change. In our parish at daily Mass, communion is distributed at the altar rail. Does it make any difference if a blessing is received in that manner rather than in the communion line? And given the number of EMHC’s that are used in most parishes, does the practice confuse the issue of who may give blessings in the context of the Mass? It is still unclear to me. And is the communion line the only way we have of making people feel welcome?

 

[baliano]

Yes, of course. This fact really doesn’t need repeating every time we discuss blessings.

But if we are serious about wanting to encourage others to become Catholics, shouldn’t we at least do them the courtesy of actually LlSTENING to them? They tell us that receiving a blessing in the line has tremendous meaning and impact, and can lead them to ask to become Catholic.

How does it hurt the rest of us who do receive Holy Communion if the person in front of us receives a personal gesture of welcome? It doesn’t diminish what WE have received, surely?

The Apostle Paul wrote about being all things to all people, and to take into account others’ feelings.

I really feel that sometimes we Catholics have an awfully niggardly attitude. We should be going out into the highways and byways to invite others to the wedding feast., and at the very least, welcoming those who come in.

As I said, how does seeing others come forward with us, diminish what we receive? Personally, it makes me rejoice that perhaps someone is taking the first steps, and even, maybe, will end up a great saint.

I agree with this position provided the EMHC doesn’t assume he/she can give a blessing. it’s also important that the one being blessed understand the difference between something an EMHC might say and a true blessing from an ordained minister.

 

[buc_fan33]

Yes, of course. This fact really doesn’t need repeating every time we discuss blessings.

But if we are serious about wanting to encourage others to become Catholics, shouldn’t we at least do them the courtesy of actually LlSTENING to them? They tell us that receiving a blessing in the line has tremendous meaning and impact, and can lead them to ask to become Catholic.

How does it hurt the rest of us who do receive Holy Communion if the person in front of us receives a personal gesture of welcome? It doesn’t diminish what WE have received, surely?

The Apostle Paul wrote about being all things to all people, and to take into account others’ feelings.

I really feel that sometimes we Catholics have an awfully niggardly attitude. We should be going out into the highways and byways to invite others to the wedding feast., and at the very least, welcoming those who come in.

As I said, how does seeing others come forward with us, diminish what we receive? Personally, it makes me rejoice that perhaps someone is taking the first steps, and even, maybe, will end up a great saint.

Excellent post. This may sound weird, but I distinctly remember as a young boy going up with my parents to receive a blessing from the priest, until I made my first Communion. I believe that small, weekly, gesture, was formative in my early years, and made me desire to receive our Lord in the Eucharist all the more when that day came. On my first communion day, the priest (who I remember well) after giving me the Body of Christ, looked at me, smiled, and said, “Finally!”

Was this the most formative moment in my life? Probably not. But, I have no doubt that the seeds of my priestly vocation were in some small way planted through that simple liturgical gesture.

 

[Vico]

Yes, of course. This fact really doesn’t need repeating every time we discuss blessings.

But if we are serious about wanting to encourage others to become Catholics, shouldn’t we at least do them the courtesy of actually LlSTENING to them? They tell us that receiving a blessing in the line has tremendous meaning and impact, and can lead them to ask to become Catholic.

How does it hurt the rest of us who do receive Holy Communion if the person in front of us receives a personal gesture of welcome? It doesn’t diminish what WE have received, surely?

The Apostle Paul wrote about being all things to all people, and to take into account others’ feelings.

I really feel that sometimes we Catholics have an awfully niggardly attitude. We should be going out into the highways and byways to invite others to the wedding feast., and at the very least, welcoming those who come in.

As I said, how does seeing others come forward with us, diminish what we receive? Personally, it makes me rejoice that perhaps someone is taking the first steps, and even, maybe, will end up a great saint.

There have been many changes in the Mass. In earlier eras the Catechumens and others that were excommunicated were not allowed into the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

The blessing is not prohibited at communion, and one reason it is done because of the discomfort that non-communicants might feel at being left in the pews, but it is not a norm provided for in the GIRM. Perhaps is will become a norm someday.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I agree with this position provided the EMHC doesn’t assume he/she can give a blessing. it’s also important that the one being blessed understand the difference between something an EMHC might say and a true blessing from an ordained minister.

Of all the things that it is useful for a non-Catholic to know or a student of RCIA to be informed about, as a priest I fail to see why this matter should be a priority.

When I have taught students coming into the Church, I am occupied with matters of Trinitarian theology, Christology, Mariology, moral theology, sacramental theology as it relates to the seven sacraments and the chief sacramentals, and other aspects of systematic theology. The nature of a blessing and above all the distinction when it is imparted by a bishop, by a priest (which has different implications from a bishop, because of the revised theology related to reserved blessings), a deacon or a lay minister is – to use the term of Vatican II, in “The Hierarchy of Truths” – so far down that very hierarchy as to be of little import.

And I return to posting what His Excellency, the Bishop of Saint Petersburg wrote as a directive to his diocese: Extraordinary Ministers DO impart a blessing to those in the Communion procession in his diocese. His Excellency kindly posts this on the Internet but the practice he endorses has been so in many American dioceses I have had occasion to visit over my years of priesthood.
Question: Can an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion (EMHC) give a blessing to a person who comes to them in the communion line with arms crossed?
Answer: The answer is yes.
The norms of the diocesan bishop of the place should be faithfully complied with.

dosp.org/worship/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/Can-an-Extraordinary-Minister-of-Communion-give-a-blessing.pdf

 

[baliano]

Of all the things that it is useful for a non-Catholic to know or a student of RCIA to be informed about, as a priest I fail to see why this matter should be a priority.

When I have taught students coming into the Church, I am occupied with matters of Trinitarian theology, Christology, Mariology, moral theology, sacramental theology as it relates to the seven sacraments and the chief sacramentals, and other aspects of systematic theology. The nature of a blessing and above all the distinction when it is imparted by a bishop, by a priest (which has different implications from a bishop, because of the revised theology related to reserved blessings), a deacon or a lay minister is – to use the term of Vatican II, in “The Hierarchy of Truths” – so far down that very hierarchy as to be of little import.

And I return to posting what His Excellency, the Bishop of Saint Petersburg wrote as a directive to his diocese: Extraordinary Ministers DO impart a blessing to those in the Communion procession in his diocese. His Excellency kindly posts this on the Internet but the practice he endorses has been so in many American dioceses I have had occasion to visit over my years of priesthood.
Question: Can an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion (EMHC) give a blessing to a person who comes to them in the communion line with arms crossed?
Answer: The answer is yes.
The norms of the diocesan bishop of the place should be faithfully complied with.

dosp.org/worship/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/Can-an-Extraordinary-Minister-of-Communion-give-a-blessing.pdf

If the person is going to be told to approach in the communion lines with arms crossed how much more does it take to explain to him or her the limits of such action? It seems to me rather haphazard to give partial instructions, of course I’m a retired engineer not clergy. Partial instruction and misunderstanding in my field could result in the loss of millions of dollars and possible loss of life so I may be oversensitive.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

If the person is going to be told to approach in the communion lines with arms crossed how much more does it take to explain to him or her the limits of such action? It seems to me rather haphazard to give partial instructions, of course I’m a retired engineer not clergy. Partial instruction and misunderstanding in my field could result in the loss of millions of dollars and possible loss of life so I may be oversensitive.

And I thank you very much for posting precisely this because it gives me the opportunity to ask you exactly the question I have long wanted to ask.

You are an engineer. I am a priest. I went through years of training and formation. I was examined extensively on how to conduct myself, for but one example, in the confessional. What my faculties covered. What my faculties don’t cover. Aspects of moral theology. Aspects of canon law. What was reserved to the bishop. What was reserved to the Holy See. How to petition for faculties that are reserved and what procedures need to be observed.

I need to know that because of celebrating the sacrament…I am the one who absolves. The penitent does not need the knowledge that I have.

You are an engineer. Your knowledge is critical for the structure’s integrity. I do not need your knowledge simply in order to access and avail myself of the building.

Surely to goodness you are not saying that I need your level of knowledge as an engineer just to use the building.

Surely to goodness you are not saying that you or someone of comparable education needs to be stationed at the front door of a building to explain to me the fine points of engineering when I simply want to enter the building.

Similarly: why do you, and people of your school of thought, feel that there is some urgent need for a fulsome and comprehensive explanation of the theology of blessing to be given before someone, such as the priest who was blessed as a child and who writes three posts above my present post, receives a blessing? Why does an RCIA candidate need a thorough explanation of the distinction between constitutive blessing as opposed to an invocative blessing?

I don’t explain the theology of blessing each and every time I confer a blessing. Why does the Bishop of Saint Petersburg, and the bishops who have made the same disposition, need to have an explanation made before the act they have legislated is done…what an extraordinary minister says as opposed to an ordinary minister and how they are distinct theologically?

Most people I encounter, frankly, are simply not that interested in such a fine point of theology. Why do you think that they are? And what, since you are an engineer, is the empirical basis for your conclusion?

As a priest of many years, I honestly do not understand the obsession that is expressed on this issue by certain people on various threads in this forum. It is utterly nonsensical to me as a professor of liturgy and sacraments.

 

[baliano]

And I thank you very much for posting precisely this because it gives me the opportunity to ask you exactly the question I have long wanted to ask.

You are an engineer. I am a priest. I went through years of training and formation. I was examined extensively on how to conduct myself, for but one example, in the confessional. What my faculties covered. What my faculties don’t cover. Aspects of moral theology. Aspects of canon law. What was reserved to the bishop. What was reserved to the Holy See. How to petition for faculties that are reserved and what procedures need to be observed.

I need to know that because of celebrating the sacrament…I am the one who absolves. The penitent does not need the knowledge that I have.

You are an engineer. Your knowledge is critical for the structure’s integrity. I do not need your knowledge simply in order to access and avail myself of the building.

Surely to goodness you are not saying that I need your level of knowledge as an engineer just to use the building.

Surely to goodness you are not saying that you or someone of comparable education needs to be stationed at the front door of a building to explain to me the fine points of engineering when I simply want to enter the building.

Similarly: why do you, and people of your school of thought, feel that there is some urgent need for a fulsome and comprehensive explanation of the theology of blessing to be given before someone, such as the priest who was blessed as a child and who writes three posts above my present post, receives a blessing? Why does an RCIA candidate need a thorough explanation of the distinction between constitutive blessing as opposed to an invocative blessing?

I don’t explain the theology of blessing each and every time I confer a blessing. Why does the Bishop of Saint Petersburg, and the bishops who have made the same disposition, need to have an explanation made before the act they have legislated is done…what an extraordinary minister says as opposed to an ordinary minister and how they are distinct theologically?

Most people I encounter, frankly, are simply not that interested in such a fine point of theology. Why do you think that they are? And what, since you are an engineer, is the empirical basis for your conclusion?

As a priest of many years, I honestly do not understand the obsession that is expressed on this issue by certain people on various threads in this forum. It is utterly nonsensical to me as a professor of liturgy and sacraments.

When I was being taught way back in the '40’s and ‘50’ by priests, brothers and sisters I paid attention, I internalized what I was taught and most important to this conversation is that 60+ years later I remember what I was taught. These RCIA students will also remember what they were taught so shouldn’t it be as comprehensive as possible?

It isn’t a fine point of Theology to suggest that when there is a limit to what should be expected, in this case a “blessing” by an EMHC, the person being instructed should be made aware of that limitation. This isn’t even a theological issue, it’s a matter of unabridged education.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

When I was being taught way back in the '40’s and ‘50’ by priests, brothers and sisters I paid attention, I internalized what I was taught and most important to this conversation is that 60+ years later I remember what I was taught. These RCIA students will also remember what they were taught so shouldn’t it be as comprehensive as possible?

It isn’t a fine point of Theology to suggest that when there is a limit to what should be expected, in this case a “blessing” by an EMHC, the person being instructed should be made aware of that limitation. This isn’t even a theological issue, it’s a matter of unabridged education.

When you were being taught way back in the 40s and 50s, by the priests, brothers and sisters, are we talking about 60 or 90 minutes per week or school that met all day, five days per week?

I wish that I would have had the luxury of teaching RCIA students about the Church at the same level I did seminarians I was preparing for the priesthood…classes all day, five days per week. I assume that you did not become an engineer by having one 60 or 90 minute class per week for seven months…which is the time I had to prepare RCIA students to be Catholic.

I had a lot more important things to teach, in what came down to a matter of hours, than the distinction between constitutive blessing and invocative blessing. I remember the reaction of most of those RCIA catechumen and candidates was that they were receiving, as it was, more information than they could process.

 

[JimG]

Excellent post. This may sound weird, but I distinctly remember as a young boy going up with my parents to receive a blessing from the priest, until I made my first Communion. I believe that small, weekly, gesture, was formative in my early years, and made me desire to receive our Lord in the Eucharist all the more when that day came. On my first communion day, the priest (who I remember well) after giving me the Body of Christ, looked at me, smiled, and said, “Finally!”

Was this the most formative moment in my life? Probably not. But, I have no doubt that the seeds of my priestly vocation were in some small way planted through that simple liturgical gesture.

I suppose it does come down mostly to what one has become accustomed to. In your case, the communion line blessing was an established custom and a precursor to your first communion.

At my first parish and parish school, in an earlier time, no one approached the communion rail except to receive communion. Mostly, children too young to receive stayed in the pews, although some did walk up with their parents, but simply tagged along without making a gesure or receiving a blessing.

I first noticed priests giving blessings to babies being carried by parents, but the custom of other non-communicants coming up in the communion line did not start until much later, at least where I was at.

The current custom is most likely too well established to change. In looking up some information about this, I came across some perhaps conflicting articles.

Blessings for Non-Communicants, posted on EWTN:

On Giving Blessings During the Communion Rite, from the Adoremus Bulletin

And most startling of all, this one by Fr. Corey Sticha, sure to raise eyebrows if not ire:
Why I Refuse to Bless Children at Communion

 

[baliano]

When you were being taught way back in the 40s and 50s, by the priests, brothers and sisters, are we talking about 60 or 90 minutes per week or school that met all day, five days per week?

I wish that I would have had the luxury of teaching RCIA students about the Church at the same level I did seminarians I was preparing for the priesthood…classes all day, five days per week. I assume that you did not become an engineer by having one 60 or 90 minute class per week for seven months…which is the time I had to prepare RCIA students to be Catholic.

I had a lot more important things to teach, in what came down to a matter of hours, than the distinction between constitutive blessing and invocative blessing. I remember the reaction of most of those RCIA catechumen and candidates was that they were receiving, as it was, more information than they could process.

Yes Father, I understand the time differential and I also appreciate that you are making the best use of your time. This brief conversation has been enlightening and has greatly enhanced my appreciation of the catechesis I received.

 

[FrDavid96]

Of all the things that it is useful for a non-Catholic to know or a student of RCIA to be informed about, as a priest I fail to see why this matter should be a priority.

When I have taught students coming into the Church, I am occupied with matters of Trinitarian theology, Christology, Mariology, moral theology, sacramental theology as it relates to the seven sacraments and the chief sacramentals, and other aspects of systematic theology. The nature of a blessing and above all the distinction when it is imparted by a bishop, by a priest (which has different implications from a bishop, because of the revised theology related to reserved blessings), a deacon or a lay minister is – to use the term of Vatican II, in “The Hierarchy of Truths” – so far down that very hierarchy as to be of little import.

And I return to posting what His Excellency, the Bishop of Saint Petersburg wrote as a directive to his diocese: Extraordinary Ministers DO impart a blessing to those in the Communion procession in his diocese. His Excellency kindly posts this on the Internet but the practice he endorses has been so in many American dioceses I have had occasion to visit over my years of priesthood.
Question: Can an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion (EMHC) give a blessing to a person who comes to them in the communion line with arms crossed?
Answer: The answer is yes.
The norms of the diocesan bishop of the place should be faithfully complied with.

dosp.org/worship/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/Can-an-Extraordinary-Minister-of-Communion-give-a-blessing.pdf

I can’t just sit by and keep reading. I must say something here.

You’ve posted repeatedly about obedience to the local bishop.

What about obedience to the Church? Why does that go by the wayside?

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.
2. 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.
3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest [the word is “sacerdos” which means both bishop and presbyter], may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.
4. That sound tradition may be retained, and yet the way remain open to legitimate progress careful investigation is always to be made into each part of the liturgy which is to be revised. This investigation should be theological, historical, and pastoral. Also the general laws governing the structure and meaning of the liturgy must be studied in conjunction with the experience derived from recent liturgical reforms and from the indults conceded to various places. Finally, there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.
   CONSTITUTION
   ON THE SACRED LITURGY
   SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM
   vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
   This is the teaching of Vatican II.

It has been repeated by the Church over and over again. It’s been repeated in every revision of the Roman Missal and the GIRM for 40+ years. It’s been repeated more recently in St John Paul II’s Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia and the resulting instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum

Changes to the Mass cannot be (legitimately) made by the priest, the bishop, or even the conference of bishops without the approval of the Holy See.

There is a procedure for requesting changes or adaptations to the Mass. Briefly, that procedure is that the conference of bishops for that territory proposes the change, and then the Holy See approves it (or not). This has not happened. That’s an objective fact. It’s not mere opinion. It has not happened. Nor has the Holy See ever given the conferences, the individual bishops, or the individual priests the authority to make this change to the Mass.

We read in Redemptionis Sacramentum
[28.] All liturgical norms that a Conference of Bishops will have established for its territory in accordance with the law are to be submitted to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments for the recognitio, without which they lack any binding force.

The Holy See has not approved any blessings in the Communion line during Mass.

So, I must repeat my initial question: why advocate so strongly for obedience to the local bishop, while at the same time advocating for (what amounts objectively to) a disobedience to the Catholic Church?

 

[powerofk]

Thank you, dear priests, for your (name removed by moderator)ut. Honestly, as a layperson, I see the essential problem as this: many dioceses and parishes seem to believe that blessing people in communion lines is allowed; many do not. The true problem, though, is the confusion this confers on the laity. If a layperson in persistent mortal sin is used to being allowed to receive a blessing due to not being able to receive the Eucharist then visits or moves to a diocese and/or parish that does not allow such blessings to be conferred, then he/she will believe that an injustice has been done to him/her. This would be even more the case if he/she returns to his/her home parish and asks the pastor what happened.

There is nothing more confusing to the laity (especially the fairly mobile laity that we have in the US) than our shepherds arguing about what is allowed at Mass and what isn’t. Other than language, homily, and allowed options for the Penitential Rite/sprinkling, readings (if applicable on a specific Sunday), Eucharistic prayer, profession of faith, and Memorial Acclamation, an Ordinary Form Mass in any given parish on any given Sunday should be the same. And they should be the same regardless of where we are in the world. What is mandatory should be mandatory, what is encouraged should be encouraged, what is merely permitted should be left up to the individual pastors and bishops, and what is not allowed should be not allowed. And if the Holy See has not decided on an issue, pastors should be very careful about encouraging the practice, as many, many people will be upset if what they see as a “right” being “taken away”.

 

[babochka]

Thank you, dear priests, for your (name removed by moderator)ut. Honestly, as a layperson, I see the essential problem as this: many dioceses and parishes seem to believe that blessing people in communion lines is allowed; many do not. The true problem, though, is the confusion this confers on the laity. If a layperson in persistent mortal sin is used to being allowed to receive a blessing due to not being able to receive the Eucharist then visits or moves to a diocese and/or parish that does not allow such blessings to be conferred, then he/she will believe that an injustice has been done to him/her. This would be even more the case if he/she returns to his/her home parish and asks the pastor what happened.

There is nothing more confusing to the laity (especially the fairly mobile laity that we have in the US) than our shepherds arguing about what is allowed at Mass and what isn’t. Other than language, homily, and allowed options for the Penitential Rite/sprinkling, readings (if applicable on a specific Sunday), Eucharistic prayer, profession of faith, and Memorial Acclamation, an Ordinary Form Mass in any given parish on any given Sunday should be the same. And they should be the same regardless of where we are in the world. What is mandatory should be mandatory, what is encouraged should be encouraged, what is merely permitted should be left up to the individual pastors and bishops, and what is not allowed should be not allowed. And if the Holy See has not decided on an issue, pastors should be very careful about encouraging the practice, as many, many people will be upset if what they see as a “right” being “taken away”.

I understand why some would experience confusion. It could also be confusing for priests who are not accustomed to giving such blessings to have someone approach with arms crossed. As an Eastern Catholic, this is my normal posture for receiving Communion (unless I have a baby in my hands, which has been nearly constant for several years). If I go to Mass, I’m pretty flexible and I’ll adjust my posture to the expected posture (hands folded in front of me). My children, although I always remind them, don’t necessarily do that, and have often been surprised by blessings when they intended to receive Communion.

What I don’t understand is the insistence that there needs to be consistency throughout the world in every minute matter during the liturgy. There are already codified variations on when to sit, when to stand, when to kneel. In some cases, one might experience these approved variations within the same diocese, or in neighboring dioceses. Some parishes have Communion rails and use them, others have Communion rails and do not use them. Some have a Communion line that only goes down a center aisle. Others might use side aisles or even station Extraordinary Ministers in the back. Altar servers might use a paten for Communion in some places, but not in others. I once attended at Extraordinary Form Mass in which everybody put their hands under a white cloth, which was laid across the altar rail. That isn’t done at the FSSP parish that I occasionally attend, but I quickly figured out what to do by observing others, and did it. In my own parish, an altar server holds a red cloth under the chin of communicants as they receive. I recently attended Divine Liturgy at a different parish and communicants were expected to take up the cloth themselves and hold it there. It threw me off for about 1/2 a second, then I adjusted. The univeral nature of the Church does not demand uniformity in all things.

 

[zab]

Regarding blessings in the Communion line, what Cardinal Arinze said about it in a Q & A session when asked his thoughts about a bishop of a certain diocese who asked parents not to present their children for a blessing in the Communion line:
“There is no liturgical directive against that…And there is no liturgical directive in favor of that. None. Therefore it is left to local practice.”…"We examined it in Rome when we wrote the document on the Holy Eucharist…We decided to say nothing about it, you know that, in order to allow freedom to the diocese. Therefore the bishop has the right to say, “Please don’t do it this way- or do it the other way. It is not a point worth fighting over.”
at 2:19 into video youtube.com/watch?v=-YorjE844mc

 

[baliano]

Regarding blessings in the Communion line, what Cardinal Arinze said about it in a Q & A session when asked his thoughts about a bishop of a certain diocese who asked parents not to present their children for a blessing in the Communion line:
“There is no liturgical directive against that…And there is no liturgical directive in favor of that. None. Therefore it is left to local practice.”…"We examined it in Rome when we wrote the document on the Holy Eucharist…We decided to say nothing about it, you know that, in order to allow freedom to the diocese. Therefore the bishop has the right to say, “Please don’t do it this way- or do it the other way. It is not a point worth fighting over.”
at 2:19 into video youtube.com/watch?v=-YorjE844mc

Is there a better, official, reference to that than You Tube? Hopefully one substantiates the “we” in his statement.