S
stephraim
Guest
It seems from rubrics that it is prohibited liturgically. Outside liturgy, I can’t say (though I would venture it’s also discouraged).
- Status
R
Remington
Guest
That’s the basis for my question. I cannot find where the Church prohibits a layperson from making the sign of the cross while blessing someone in the name of the Holy Trinity. I always thought it was prohibited too but it doesn’t appear to be.
R
Remington
Guest
Some of the comments on this thread concern me. It seems that some embrace “constitutive” blessings from a cleric as worthwhile while viewing “invocative” blessings from a layperson as being nothing more than a waste of time. How sad.
I didn’t see anyone try to equate the two but I saw several people either directly or indirectly demean the value of a blessing from a layperson. That’s very sad.
I didn’t see anyone try to equate the two but I saw several people either directly or indirectly demean the value of a blessing from a layperson. That’s very sad.
S
stephraim
Guest
I have never held such a view. The Church allows laity to say the invocative prayer while leading one of Her liturgies. The rubrics of these various liturgies clearly tell laity to sign themselves, not make the sign of the cross over the people. Here’s an example (one of many) from the Book of Blessings, “Order for a Blessing to Be Used in Various Circumstances”:
1986 The present order may be used by a priest or deacon. It may also be used by a layperson, who follows the rites and prayers designated for a lay minister.
1999 A minister who is a priest or deacon says the prayer of blessing with hands outstretched; a lay minister says the prayer with hands joined.
2009 A minister who is a priest or deacon concludes the rite by saying:
May God, Who is blessed above all,
bless you in all things through Christ,
so that whatever happens in your lives
will work together for your good.
R. Amen.
Then he blesses all present.
And may almighty God bless you all,
the Father, and the Son, + and the Holy Spirit.
R. Amen.
2010 A lay minister concludes the rite by signing himself or herself with the sign of the cross and saying:
May God, Who is blessed above all,
bless us in all things through Christ,
so that whatever happens in our lives
will work together for our good.
R. Amen.
From the General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours:
- Then, if a priest or deacon is presiding, he dismisses the congregation with the greeting, The Lord be with you, and the blessing as at Mass. He adds the invitation, Go in peace. R. Thanks be to God. In the absence of a priest or deacon the celebration concludes with May the Lord bless us, etc.
- In the absence of a priest or deacon, the one who presides at the office is only one among equals and does not enter the sanctuary or greet and bless the people.
A leader of prayer who is a deacon says:
Code:
The Lord be with you.
Code:
And also with you.
Code:
May almighty God bless you,
the Father, and the Son + and the Holy Spirit.A leader of prayer who is a layperson signs himself or herself with the sign of the cross and says:
Code:
May the Lord bless us,
protect us from all evil
and bring us to everlasting life.From the Rite of Distributing Holy Communion Outside of Mass:
- If the minister is a priest or deacon, he extends his hands and, facing the people, says:
The Lord be with you.
He blesses the people with these words:
May almighty God bless you,
the Father, and the Son, + and the Holy Spirit.
The people answer: Amen.
- If the minister is not a priest or deacon, he invokes God’s blessing and, crossing himself, says:
protect us from all evil
and bring us to everlasting life.
S
stephraim
Guest
I hope I’ve now given you proof that, when all the rubrics and even the private missive of the CDWDS are combined, show laity are not to bless the people while making the sign of the cross over them as clergy do during the Church’s liturgies (Holy Mass, Lauds/Vespers, SCAP, RDHCOM, BoB).
A
Aramis
Guest
The prohibition is on making the sign of the cross over the person or thing. A cleric signs themself when praying, but when blessing, signs over the person or thing being blessed.???
I said I thought the Church specifically forbids laypeople to make the sign of the cross while blessing someone else. It doesn’t and that’s news to me. I am sure I have heard or read that a layperson is prohibited from doing this by the Church (probably via EWTN) but again, that’s clearly not the case unless of course we all have missed something here.
Yes we can all draw inferences from the BoB and other documents but the prohibition does not exist. Nevertheless I can certainly see how it would be incongruent for a layperson to make the sign of the cross in certain settings (some more so than others) but again, it’s not a practice that is prohibited by the Church.
You should always sign yourself with the sign of the cross when saying the names of the persons of the Trinity as part of a prayer.
R
Remington
Guest
Where is that documented? It doesn’t appear to be. I used to think it was too but I cannot locate a source.
Sure this is true if a ritual (say the BofB or the communion service ritual) specifies where a persons hands are to be for a specific blessing or liturgy but it’s not a general requirement like I thought it was. In a great many circumstances it would be just fine for a layperson to make the sign of the cross over a person as they were blessing them.
R
Remington
Guest
When there is an approved ritual for a specific blessing or liturgy then we should follow those rubrics including those for how we position our hands.
Those rituals are not universal though. They do not define/constrain how a layperson is supposed to position their hands while blessing someone outside of a blessing or liturgy where there is no approved ritual.
M
Matthew_Holford
Guest
Where it is documented that the laity can make the sign of the cross over a person while blessing them?
A
Aramis
Guest
The book of blessings notes it, in the introduction, that the only formal blessings a layperson may give (within the Roman Tradition, at least) are those delineated.
Ancient Roman Tradition is that the faculty to bless was a separate competence granted by the bishop, but inherent in presbyteral ordination as well.
However, documentation of the prohbition on the laity can be seen in the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia Entry for Blessing.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
IT’s not documented that an EMHC should not bestow blessings.
Rather, it’s documented that no one but the ordained appropriately give blessings at liturgy. And, perhaps more importantly, it’s clearly documented what the role of EMHCs are. And nowhere in Catholic Church teaching does the Church say that EMHCs are empowered (whatever) to give a blessing. EMHCs are ministers for one and only one purpose: the distribution of holy communion. That is the extent and limit of their ministry.
Nowhere does the Church teach that laity can give blessings at liturgy. That’s the point.
R
Remington
Guest
No way does the BoB carry the authority to limit the “formal” blessings a layperson may give as those listed within the BoB. Then again maybe that is the very definition of “formal” – if it’s listed in the BoB?
“Ancient Roman Tradition” or not, layperson may indeed bless others. That’s not in question.
The 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia is not authoritative.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Sheesh! The EMHC is ministering the Blessed Sacrament–the Body/Blood/Soul and Divinity, why in the world would she not be able to administer a blessing?
S
stephraim
Guest
Why? Because the CDWDS has said so:
- 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).
§ 2. To promote the proper identity (of various roles) in this area, those abuses which are contrary to the provisions of canon 907 are to be eradicated. In eucharistic celebrations deacons and non-ordained members of the faithful may not pronounce prayers — e.g. especially the eucharistic prayer, with its concluding doxology — or any other parts of the liturgy reserved to the celebrant priest. Neither may deacons or non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the same priest celebrant.
Blessing the people while making the Sign of the Cross over the them during the eucharistic liturgy is a gesture the rubrics give only to the celebrant priest (cf. Roman Missal, GIRM, CB). I would say it is therefore “reserved to the celebrant priest” and that “neither may deacons or non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the same priest celebrant.”
The same document says:
“It should also be understood that these clarifications and distinctions do not stem from a concern to defend clerical privileges but from the need to be obedient to the will of Christ, and to respect the constitutive form which he indelibly impressed on his Church”. (John Paul II, Discourse at the Symposium on “The Participation of the Lay Faithful in the Priestly Ministry” (11 May 1994), n. 3, l.c.)
S
stephraim
Guest
I would say that “formal” blessings are those are those blessings of a liturgical character; in other words, as you suggest, those listed in the* Book of Blessings*.
I think informal blessings are those such as a lay person saying, “God bless” or “May God be with you”, etc. There is no liturgy associated with something like that. Whether or not the laity should make the Sign of the Cross at that point is not discussed in the liturgical books, but by analogy with all the blessings allowed by laity in the liturgical books, one could argue the inappropriateness of such an action.
May I suggest instead that the laity sign themselves with the Sign of the Cross because 1.) that’s what liturgical books prescribe for liturgical blessings, and 2.) the Enchiridion of Indulgences says, “A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful, who devoutly sign themselves with the sign of the cross, while saying the customary words: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”(EI, no. 55)
R
Remington
Guest
In the end I wanted to see if the Church generally prohibits laypersons (not just EMsHC) from blessing others in the Name of the Holy Trinity with making the sign of the cross over them. It does not.
Yes there are possibly places where no blessings should be given by laypersons (I didn’t ask about that), situations where blessings by laypersons are specifically defined by a documented ritual (OK, makes sense), and situations where there is no specific prohibition but it might be imprudent for a layperson to do it (left up to one’s judgment and not something the Church defines.)
A
Aramis
Guest
Sorry, but wrong.
Immemorial Tradition (as evidenced by the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia Entry) shows that the church did ban such. In fact, aside from one particular blessing, prior to 1917, deacons did not bless. The 1983 CIC does not specifically alter this, and as it is both discipline and custom of the Roman Church, and of the Eastern Churches, it has force of law, save where specifically altered.
The Book of Blessings specifically alters this, as do certain sacramentary entries for certain paraliturgical services lead by laypersons, and several for paraliturgies led by deacons.
Since the tradition is given force of law in CIC…
Can. 5 §1. Universal or particular customs presently in force which are contrary to the prescripts of these canons and are reprobated by the canons of this Code are absolutely suppressed and are not permitted to revive in the future. Other contrary customs are also considered suppressed unless the Code expressly provides otherwise or unless they are centenary or immemorial customs which can be tolerated if, in the judgment of the ordinary, they cannot be removed due to the circumstances of places and persons.
§2. Universal or particular customs beyond the law (praeter ius) which are in force until now are preserved.
Can. 6 §1. When this Code takes force, the following are abrogated:
1/ the Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1917;
2/ other universal or particular laws contrary to the prescripts of this Code unless other provision is expressly made for particular laws;
3/ any universal or particular penal laws whatsoever issued by the Apostolic See unless they are contained in this Code;
4/ other universal disciplinary laws regarding matter which this Code completely reorders.
§2. Insofar as they repeat former law, the canons of this Code must be assessed also in accord with canonical tradition.
Can. 7 …]
Can. 26 Unless the competent legislator has specifically approved it, a custom contrary to the canon law now in force or one beyond a canonical law (praeter legem canonicam) obtains the force of law only if it has been legitimately observed for thirty continuous and complete years. Only a centenary or immemorial custom, however, can prevail against a canonical law which contains a clause prohibiting future customs.
Can. 27 Custom is the best interpreter of laws.
Can. 28 Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 5, a contrary custom or law revokes a custom which is contrary to or beyond the law (praeter legem). Unless it makes express mention of them, however, a law does not revoke centenary or immemorial customs, nor does a universal law revoke particular customs.
Since the Discipine barring the faithful from giving blessings is more than 30 years old, and in fact several hundred, it requires specific mention to abrogate that custom as having force of law.
The formal blessings in the Book of Blessings DO have abrogration, since they specifically allow a previously prohibited praxis.
Likewise, the Customary blessings of food and of those who sneeze are, by centenary or older tradition (as evidenced by their rubrics in the Baltimore Catechism) performed by crossing one’s self unless one is a priest or bishop.
Certain pious practices run on the ragged edge: the tracing of the cross in holy water by Byzantine parents upon their children’s head (followed by the parent signing themself, and/or both drinking some holy water)…
But the immemorial custom does prohibit non-priests from making the sign of the cross over in the manner a priest does, so only those blessings permitted explicitly are permitted at all.
R
Remington
Guest
Sorry but no dice.
You went though a great deal of effort and you didn’t show where the Church prohibits laypersons from blessing others in the Name of the Holy Trinity while making the sign of the cross over then except as I noted in a a situation where a specific ritual (such as during a communion service) is the controlling document.
Out of convolution comes myth. In some cases it can get to the level where it enjoys the practical authority of actual directions from the Church. Over time it can become difficult to distinguish between the two.
A
Aramis
Guest
The 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia notes that ONLY priests may bless. What part of that do you NOT understand???
That is the immemorial custom as well. If you can’t accept that, then I doubt any proof short of the pope himself would work for you.
Blessing is a priestly function; anyone else does so only as an extraordinary minister, and extraordinary ministers must be specifically enabled.
R
Remington
Guest
It’s what I reject – the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia as being an authoritative source despite your best effort at selling it as such.
- Status