Eucharistic Minister Blessings

[benedictgal]

Thank you very much for the posters for your information.Mea culpa,mea,culpa----I too have been called as an extraordinary Eucharist minister,in fact these days I am rostered on the Parish sheet.I knew that a lay person cannot impart a formal blessing in a Liturgical setting such as Mass.If a person(usually a child,not old enough to receive communion) came up to me with their arms crossed I said “May Jesus bless you” and with the “living God” in my unworthy hands I lightly touched the person with my little finger on their head. I concluded that I was asking Jesus to bless this child and it was not coming from me.They are God’s favorites;now that I have taken the trouble to find out the true wishes from the Holy See,I will stop this practise.

I asked a priest friend of mine on the telephone and he suggested that I say "May God Bless you"Perhaps from what has been posted about blessings at Mass that he is mistaken for giving me this advise? I just wish that Rome was much clearer(spelling it out) about this issue;as I feel sorry for the people who go to the trouble to come up for “a blessing” as this practise ,of encouraging people to go up at communion time is very widespread .

One of the reasons this has been done is for pastoral considerations.Firstly it may prevent a sacrilegeous communion,by a person who might feel shamed in remaining in his or her seat.It also encourages say ,the non catholic partner,to join the queue and not feel left out.I know that on the other side of the coin ,it perhaps causes non catholic’s to receive communion, if they have not got the instructions right about “crossing their arms”.

Unfortunately, the word “pastoral” has been used to justify a lot of abuses. During the Scrutinies, the Elect are dismissed after the Prayer of the Faithful. They do not stay for the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Is the Church being “unpastoral” for doing this? No. In the early Church, the catechumens never remained for the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

Furthermore, it bears repeating that the invitation that the celebrant makes when he says “Behold the Lamb of God…blessed are those who are called to his Supper” is to come and receive Jesus in Holy Communion. Those who are properly disposed are invited to receive Someone, not something, a blessing, that will come later in the Mass and be applicable to all.

 

[stephraim]

Sometimes I wish the ancient diaconal formula, “Si quis non communicat, det locum.” was still used. That’s roughly translated, “If anyone is not communicating (or receiving Communion), make room (or get out of the way).”

 

[karoleck]

Unfortunately, the word “pastoral” has been used to justify a lot of abuses. During the Scrutinies, the Elect are dismissed after the Prayer of the Faithful. They do not stay for the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Is the Church being “unpastoral” for doing this? No. In the early Church, the catechumens never remained for the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

Furthermore, it bears repeating that the invitation that the celebrant makes when he says “Behold the Lamb of God…blessed are those who are called to his Supper” is to come and receive Jesus in Holy Communion. Those who are properly disposed are invited to receive Someone, not something, a blessing, that will come later in the Mass and be applicable to all.

I wonder where this practise, of encouraging non catholics and those who are not able to receice Holy Communion to receive a blessing instead ,came from.Was it from the local countries’ Bishops’ Conference?.Most Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers have no control or say (apart from rejecting the parish priest’s request for help) in this matter;as it is the priest who invites people for a blessing.I remember thinking that it was a good idea and for pasteral reasons still do.(by the Priest)
Whilst what you say about “pasteral” reasons might be true in some cases of Liturgical abuse;I wonder if you are a bit harsh in your judgements.Whilst the directives from Rome should be obeyed,pasteral considerations can also be valid.As Our Lord said in His day about a legalistic approach to the Law,with the heart far from what God wanted to be adored that is “in spirit and in truth”.
I remember a priest friend telling me about a meeting of Orthodox Catholic Clergy Conference to which he is a member.They were finishing the Conference with Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament,followed by Benediction.They asked him to be the main priest officiating.BUT then a few of the Liturgical “police” said–no we cannot have Benediction as we cannot have incense because it will set off the smoke alarms.My friend asked them–"what is more important(for pasteral reasons–my imput!!) incense or Our Lord’s Blessing throught the ritual of Benediction? Now the “liturgical police” were caught out–so after a while,one of the clergy suggested that since a Bishop was present;then he could approve having Benediction without incense–the Bishop replied in the affirmative.

 

[benedictgal]

I wonder where this practise, of encouraging non catholics and those who are not able to receice Holy Communion to receive a blessing instead ,came from.Was it from the local countries’ Bishops’ Conference?.Most Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers have no control or say (apart from rejecting the parish priest’s request for help) in this matter;as it is the priest who invites people for a blessing.I remember thinking that it was a good idea and for pasteral reasons still do.(by the Priest)
Whilst what you say about “pasteral” reasons might be true in some cases of Liturgical abuse;I wonder if you are a bit harsh in your judgements.Whilst the directives from Rome should be obeyed,pasteral considerations can also be valid.As Our Lord said in His day about a legalistic approach to the Law,with the heart far from what God wanted to be adored that is “in spirit and in truth”.
I remember a priest friend telling me about a meeting of Orthodox Catholic Clergy Conference to which he is a member.They were finishing the Conference with Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament,followed by Benediction.They asked him to be the main priest officiating.BUT then a few of the Liturgical “police” said–no we cannot have Benediction as we cannot have incense because it will set off the smoke alarms.My friend asked them–"what is more important(for pasteral reasons–my imput!!) incense or Our Lord’s Blessing throught the ritual of Benediction? Now the “liturgical police” were caught out–so after a while,one of the clergy suggested that since a Bishop was present;then he could approve having Benediction without incense–the Bishop replied in the affirmative.

Actually, with all due respect, I do not think that I am being harsh. Those who use the term “liturgical police”, I believe, are being the harsh ones. Please bear in mind what Redemptionis Sacramentum states:

1. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters
   [183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.

[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.290 It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

Now, this practice of imparting blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion appears nowhere in the Roman Missal nor are there adaptations giving the recognitio by the Holy See authorizing it. No one, not even the celebrant, has the authority to imbed and insert things into the Mass on his own authority.

In my opinion, what the priest did in inviting people to come forward and receive a blessing is going beyond the bounds of what he is authorized to do. It is not pastoral, as I see it, to invite people to engage in a practice that is not even approved by Rome. It is more pastoral, instead, to gently remind those not receiving Holy Communion to remain in their pews in prayer. Everyone will receive a blessing at the appointed time, at the end of the Mass.

I wrote this back in December:

benedictgal-lexorandilexcredendi.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-we-form-line.html

As I said earlier, it’s not about being harsh; it’s about seeing how even the best of intentions can sometimes cause more harm than help.

 

[karoleck]

Actually, with all due respect, I do not think that I am being harsh. Those who use the term “liturgical police”, I believe, are being the harsh ones. Please bear in mind what Redemptionis Sacramentum states:

Now, this practice of imparting blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion appears nowhere in the Roman Missal nor are there adaptations giving the recognitio by the Holy See authorizing it. No one, not even the celebrant, has the authority to imbed and insert things into the Mass on his own authority.

In my opinion, what the priest did in inviting people to come forward and receive a blessing is going beyond the bounds of what he is authorized to do. It is not pastoral, as I see it, to invite people to engage in a practice that is not even approved by Rome. It is more pastoral, instead, to gently remind those not receiving Holy Communion to remain in their pews in prayer. Everyone will receive a blessing at the appointed time, at the end of the Mass.

I wrote this back in December:

benedictgal-lexorandilexcredendi.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-we-form-line.html

As I said earlier, it’s not about being harsh; it’s about seeing how even the best of intentions can sometimes cause more harm than help.

Thank you for your thoughts and a strong arguement supporting your views.I did like your blogspot and the information that it contained.I passed on this to my priest friend–what brought me to research this topic was that Father was telling me that his new parishioners,as acting ministers of the Eucharist were touching people and he gave them instructions not to do it! I told him about what I was doing as per my posts,so thanks to you I know what is required.
I did laught to myself, where in your blog it mentioned that “Rome” was looking into this matter!! I remember when altar girls were brought in and communion on the hand --well before Rome finally approved the actions of the Bishops’ conference.I wonder if Rome will also approve this as well, for the" local " Australia Church–as they put it–at the request of The Bishops’Conference–though they usually follow the "enlightened " Bishops of America!Thank you again.