Eucharistic Minister Blessings

[PatienceAndLove]

So next week when I am asked to help with the distribution of ashes…

That is an entirely different kettle of fish- ashes are not a blessing, they are a reminder of our own mortality and sinful nature.
“From dust you are made and to dust you shall return”, “Turn away from sin and return to the Gospel”- neither of those is a blessing.

As an EMHC, you are not ordained, ergo you cannot bless people. I suggest that you amend your practices at Communion and begin praying for people rather than blessing them. If people want a blessing, direct them to the priest’s line

 

[Brendan]

So next week when I am asked to help with the distribution of ashes…

Ashes are a Blessed Sacramental.

Like Holy Water, the blessing is not contingent on the minister, but on the Sacramental itself.

The blessing of Ashes ( like Holy Water) is the blessing of the Church as conveyed by the Ordained minister who blessed the ashes. It is the medium that conveys the blessing imparted by the priest or deacon.

 

[benedictgal]

That is an entirely different kettle of fish- ashes are not a blessing, they are a reminder of our own mortality and sinful nature.
“From dust you are made and to dust you shall return”, “Turn away from sin and return to the Gospel”- neither of those is a blessing.

As an EMHC, you are not ordained, ergo you cannot bless people. I suggest that you amend your practices at Communion and begin praying for people rather than blessing them. If people want a blessing, direct them to the priest’s line

Actually, Father should not even be imparting blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion. The CDWDS letter makes five points as to why this should not be happening in the first place. Everyone will be receiving a blessing at the end of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I suppose it bears repeating that we form a line to receive Someone, Jesus in Holy Communion, not something, a blessing. While the intentions behind these “blessings” have good intentions, amending the Mass to include this is something beyond the scope of even the celebrant.

 

[PatienceAndLove]

Actually, Father should not even be imparting blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion. The CDWDS letter makes five points as to why this should not be happening in the first place. Everyone will be receiving a blessing at the end of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I concur. I find blessings during Holy Communion to be unneeded.
However, if someone REALLY wants the blessing, the EMHC should refer that person to Father so that Father can use it as a teaching moment.

I suppose it bears repeating that we form a line to receive Someone, Jesus in Holy Communion, not something, a blessing. While the intentions behind these “blessings” have good intentions, amending the Mass to include this is something beyond the scope of even the celebrant.

Exactly. At the parish I prefer to attend, Father invites everyone up to Communion- reminding the Congregation that Holy Communion is only for Catholics in a state of grace, but those not receiving are welcome to a blessing. It bugs me, and I really want to say something, but I am not a member of the parish.

 

[TheMc]

In the normal Church-style Mass, all this is perfectly understandable.

I work in a Catholic high school in NSW, Australia. We have whole-school Masses about four times a year in the gymnasium. About 900 students. Chairs dragged across from various classrooms to cater for the numbers. You get the idea.
Anyway–the students are a bit cramped-in, as far as seating goes. At communion time, they all have to get up and move in various lines towards the Eucharistic Minister for their section. They aren’t allowed to stay seated, as it would be too chaotic–stepping over other students, squeezing past, knocking the chairs over.

So, every student, no matter what, has to approach the Eucharistic Minister (that’s what they call them here–they’re all senior students) and either receive the Eucharist or cross their arms on their chest.

No problem, I hear you say–only that they don’t get the option. We have more than a few avowed atheists among our student population who have to put up with being blessed. In their minds, they are forced to be hypocrites for the sake of traffic management.

If traffic is such a problem, then why can’t they simply walk past the EHMC or priest, possibly with a bow or genuflection? If Rome says “stop”, then shouldn’t we stop, and work around it?

 

[TheMc]

If it were a communion service where the presider is a deacon, he will impart the final blessing to the people exactly as the priest would.

Deacon can also impart a blessing if he is leading a public praying of the LOTH, I believe.

What should one do if this was brought to the attention of the person in charge of the EMHCs but that person refuses to remove the blessings? The answer from the CDWDS is pretty clear, IMO. No room for excuse I would think, but you never know.

It should be brought to the pastor, and if that gets you nowhere, the bishop, and after that, Rome.

 

[TheMc]

What should one do if this was brought to the attention of the person in charge of the EMHCs but that person refuses to remove the blessings? The answer from the CDWDS is pretty clear, IMO. No room for excuse I would think, but you never know.

It should be brought to the pastor, and if that gets you nowhere, the bishop, and after that, Rome.

 

[Lapey]

Deacon can also impart a blessing if he is leading a public praying of the LOTH, I believe.

I just mentioned one example. Yes, this is appropriate. Actually the deacon can impart blessings anywhere & anytime deemed appropriate just as a priest. Only stipulations where a priest is present, in some of the blessing rituals the rubrics read that the deacon “should” defer to the priest; not a mandate but out of respect of the priest the deacon should defer.

He can preside over the Ritual Benediction including the blessing of the faithful with the Blessed Sacrament, unless a priest is present and available.

There are restrictions on certain blessings reserved to a bishop; priests are also restricted from these blessings.

 

[FCEGM]

While I trace a cross on their forehead I lean in and tell them “Jesus loves you.” To me, that conveys the same message as “the Body of Christ”.

No, since it’s not the same reality of what is received. “The Body of Christ” calls for an assent of Faith to the Mystery received and a proclamation that one is, indeed, a member of the Body able to receive the Eucharist, thus an “Amen” response from the communicant. Saying to the communicant that “Jesus loves you” is a statement of fact, but not an invitation to the Sacrament.

 

[ArthurQArch]

Actually, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments answered this question with five observations back on November 22, 2008. The document bears an protocol number, No. 930/08/L. Here is what the CDWDS wrote:

This remains a rather contentious issue here on CAF. However, the prevailing authority in this case is the Holy See. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments acts in and with the authority of the Holy Father.

Although I agree with this whole-heartedly about lay ministers blessing people, I almost wrote an email to my pastor to make him aware of this letter instructing priests not to impart blessings at communion. But I first did a search on the document. On Zenit was an article about the letter (zenit.org/article-25463?l=english).

"Recently, however, a document has appeared in several Internet sources which indicate that the Holy See is tending toward a negative view of the practice. The document is a letter (Protocol No. 930/08/L) dated Nov. 22, 2008, sent in response to a private query and signed by Father Anthony Ward, SM, undersecretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

As a private reply the letter is not yet a norm with legal force and, as it makes clear, is not a definitive reply. However, it provides some valuable pointers on the legitimacy of this practice and the mind of the Holy See regarding it."[my italics]

We must be careful to discover (or if you already knew that, then to state such) the whole truth in such a matter. I say “we,” because I have often over-stated similar things that I felt strongly about.

 

[benedictgal]

Although I agree with this whole-heartedly about lay ministers blessing people, I almost wrote an email to my pastor to make him aware of this letter instructing priests not to impart blessings at communion. But I first did a search on the document. On Zenit was an article about the letter (zenit.org/article-25463?l=english).

"Recently, however, a document has appeared in several Internet sources which indicate that the Holy See is tending toward a negative view of the practice. The document is a letter (Protocol No. 930/08/L) dated Nov. 22, 2008, sent in response to a private query and signed by Father Anthony Ward, SM, undersecretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

As a private reply the letter is not yet a norm with legal force and, as it makes clear, is not a definitive reply. However, it provides some valuable pointers on the legitimacy of this practice and the mind of the Holy See regarding it."[my italics]

We must be careful to discover (or if you already knew that, then to state such) the whole truth in such a matter. I say “we,” because I have often over-stated similar things that I felt strongly about.

However, inasmuch as I admire Zenit and Fr. McNamara, Fr. McNamara is not an official with the CDWDS and is offering only his interpretation. Even though the response was to a private inquiry, the document is still official. It bears a protocol number and has already been published in Notitae.

This “ritual” appears nowhere in the officially recognized liturgical books of the Church. That, in itself, should be sufficient reason to not even emplly this practice since both the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy and Redemptionis Sacramentum do not allow for anyone, even the celebrant, to introduce an element into the Mass on their own authority.

When I checked with the CDWDS, they have not changed their stance on the five observations. Recall that the letter does not make new policy; it quotes what is already existing liturgical law.

 

[Phemie]

Although I agree with this whole-heartedly about lay ministers blessing people, I almost wrote an email to my pastor to make him aware of this letter instructing priests not to impart blessings at communion. But I first did a search on the document. On Zenit was an article about the letter (zenit.org/article-25463?l=english).
"Recently, however, a document has appeared in several Internet sources which indicate that the Holy See is tending toward a negative view of the practice. The document is a letter (Protocol No. 930/08/L) dated Nov. 22, 2008, sent in response to a private query and signed by Father Anthony Ward, SM, undersecretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

As a private reply the letter is not yet a norm with legal force and, as it makes clear, is not a definitive reply. However, it provides some valuable pointers on the legitimacy of this practice and the mind of the Holy See regarding it."[my italics]We must be careful to discover (or if you already knew that, then to state such) the whole truth in such a matter. I say “we,” because I have often over-stated similar things that I felt strongly about.

It’s not the letter itself that tells priests not to, it’s the documents the letter quotes that tell them these things.

A specific document and canon law already say that

1. priests aren’t to provide ceremonies or blessings of any kind for divorced and remarried Catholics, and
2. nobody who cannot receive Communion is to present him/herself to the priest in the Communion line.

The letter is just referring to those documents to show that those blessings are illicit.

 

[ArthurQArch]

Could you reference them so that I could pass them on? Thanks

 

[benedictgal]

Could you reference them so that I could pass them on? Thanks

I quoted the actual text of the letter early on in this thread.

 

[ArthurQArch]

I meant the canons, not the letter. The letter is “not yet a norm with legal force and, as it makes clear, is not a definitive reply.”

 

[ArthurQArch]

Oh wait, I see the canons are listed in the letter. Me bad.

 

[stephraim]

Here are the quotations:

Ecclesiae de mysterio, Art. 6 § 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. It is a grave abuse for any member of the non-ordained faithful to “quasi preside” at the Mass while leaving only that minimal participation to the priest which is necessary to secure validity.

In the same way, the use of sacred vestments which are reserved to priests or deacons (stoles, chasubles or dalmatics) at liturgical ceremonies by non-ordained members of the faithful is clearly unlawful.

Every effort must be made to avoid even the appearance of confusion which can spring from anomalous liturgical practices. As the sacred ministers are obliged to wear all of the prescribed liturgical vestments so too the non-ordained faithful may not assume that which is not proper to them.

To avoid any confusion between sacramental liturgical acts presided over by a priest or deacon, and other acts which the non-ordained faithful may lead, it is always necessary to use clearly distinct ceremonials, especially for the latter."

Can. 1169 §2 “Any priest can impart blessings, except for those reserved to the Roman Pontiff or to Bishops.”

Book of Blessings (De Benedictionibus), no. 18 "The ministry of blessing involves a particular exercise of the priesthood of Christ and, in keeping with the place and office within the people of God belonging to each person, the exercise of this ministry is determined in the following manner:

a. It belongs to the ministry of the *bishop *to preside at celebrations that involve the entire diocesan community and that are carried out with special solemnity and with a large attendance of the faithful. The bishop, accordingly, may reserve certain celebrations to himself, particularly those celebrated with special solemnity.

b. It belongs to the ministry of a presbyter or priest, in keeping with the nature of his service to the people of God, to preside at those blessings especially that involve the community he is appointed to serve. Priests therefore may preside at the celebration of all the blessings in this book, unless a bishop is present as presider.

c. It belongs to the ministry of a deacon to preside at those blessings that are so indicated in place in this book, because, as the minister of the altar, of the word, and of charity, the deacon is the assistant of the bishop and the college of presbyters.

 But whenever a priest is present, it is more fitting that the office of presiding be assigned to him and that the deacon assist by carrying out those functions proper to the diaconate.

d. An acolyte or reader who by formal institution has this special office in the Church is rightly preferred over another layperson as the minister designated at the discretion of the local Ordinary to impart certain blessings.

 Other *laymen* and *laywomen*, in virtue of the universal priesthood, a dignity they possess because of their baptism and confirmation, may celebrate certain blessings, as indicated in the respective orders of blessings, by use of the rites and formularies designated for a lay minister. Such laypersons exercise this ministry in virtue of their office (for example, parents on behalf of their children) or by reason of some special liturgical ministry or in fulfillment of a particular charge in the Church, as is the case in many places with religious or catechists appointed by decision of the local Ordinary, after ascertaining their proper pastoral formation and prudence in the apostolate.

 But whenever a priest or deacon is present, the office of presiding should be left to him."

 

[stephraim]

If you take the following directives from Rome about additions to the Liturgy:

•Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 22.3 (1963)
o Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change
anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

•Canon 846.1 (1983)
o The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully
observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore no one on personal
authority may add, remove or change anything in them.

•Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125 (1992)
o For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the
minister or the community. Even the supreme authority of the Church may not
change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in obedience of faith and with religious respect
for the mystery of the liturgy.

•General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 24 (2003)
o Nevertheless, 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.

•Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31, 59 (2004)
o They ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by
corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through
arbitrary additions.

o The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there
alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to
pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred
Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.

and this text from the introduction of the Book of Blessings:

•“28. Because some blessings have a special relationship to the sacraments, they may sometimes be joined with the celebration of Mass. This book specifies what such blessings are and the part or rite with which they are to be joined; it also provides ritual norms that may not be disregarded. No blessings except those so specified may be joined with the eucharistic celebration.”

it seems fairly clear that the blessing in lieu of Holy Communion should not be done.

 

[karoleck]

If you take the following directives from Rome about additions to the Liturgy:

•Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 22.3 (1963)
o Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change
anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

•Canon 846.1 (1983)
o The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully
observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore no one on personal
authority may add, remove or change anything in them.

•Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125 (1992)
o For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the
minister or the community. Even the supreme authority of the Church may not
change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in obedience of faith and with religious respect
for the mystery of the liturgy.

•General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 24 (2003)
o Nevertheless, 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.

•Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31, 59 (2004)
o They ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by
corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through
arbitrary additions.

o The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there
alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to
pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred
Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.

and this text from the introduction of the Book of Blessings:

•“28. Because some blessings have a special relationship to the sacraments, they may sometimes be joined with the celebration of Mass. This book specifies what such blessings are and the part or rite with which they are to be joined; it also provides ritual norms that may not be disregarded. No blessings except those so specified may be joined with the eucharistic celebration.”

it seems fairly clear that the blessing in lieu of Holy Communion should not be done.

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”.

The original parish priest who called me to become an extraordinary Echaristic minister used to impart his "commissioning prayer at each Mass–which I though was the form of a blessing?"However the present priest does nothing of the sort,which I do not like very much; that is his duty not mine!! I still receive communion on the tongue–that is my right and it reminds me of my lay status.A priest once told me how he hears people saying "is it not lovely to have baby Jesus in my hands"but it is the risen Jesus who comes to our souls,all six foot of Him!

I hate it when at the end of Mass the priest prays "may the Lord bless us!!–but that is another thread!!

 

[Phemie]

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 don’t get why anyone should feel shame for staying in their pew. It is far more embarrassing to me to have forgotten my envelope at home than to not receive Communion. I’m really glad this practice has not yet hit my parish in a major way. I’ve only seen it once or twice, and that by people from outside the parish.