Extraordinary Ministers giving blessings

  • Thread starter Thread starter KathyTX
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
When someone limits themselves to five statements, they’re saying that they’re not going to say any more than the five statements at this time. How does that in any way abrogate the five statements themselves? Silliness. Obviously when the study of the matter is completed, there will be MORE statements other than the five sentences we have now. Hence the current limit. Benedictgal is spot on with this one.
 
With all due respect, the only information provided by the anonymous poster with the screen name, FrDavid96, is that he (?) is Catholic. You should not expect anyone to accept his posts as having any more weight that any other anonymous poster on this board.
You are reaching. For the past year, CAF has been doing all it can to assure that when a poster uses a title like Fr, or Pastor etc, that they are in fact what they claim to be.

It started shortly after I objected to a certain “Fr” who claimed to be Catholic, yet stated in his bio that he belonged to some organization that is not Catholic, and is not approved by the Vatican. While he still uses the title, he has dropped the claims that “support” his being Catholic… but he still calls himself Catholic.

One way to tell, or at least get a good idea, is how they post, and what they use for support and credibility, and how it aligns with Church teaching.

FrDavid96 “passes” all these tests.

By the way zab, are you Catholic? Just wondering, because your posts have made me question that. CAF often gets members who claim to be Catholic, yet are here to foster or encourage dissent.

.
 
You are reaching. For the past year, CAF has been doing all it can to assure that when a poster uses a title like Fr, or Pastor etc, that they are in fact what they claim to be.

It started shortly after I objected to a certain “Fr” who claimed to be Catholic, yet stated in his bio that he belonged to some organization that is not Catholic, and is not approved by the Vatican. While he still uses the title, he has dropped the claims that “support” his being Catholic… but he still calls himself Catholic.

One way to tell, or at least get a good idea, is how they post, and what they use for support and credibility, and how it aligns with Church teaching.

FrDavid96 “passes” all these tests.

By the way zab, are you Catholic? Just wondering, because your posts have made me question that. CAF often gets members who claim to be Catholic, yet are here to foster or encourage dissent.

.
I am a devout Catholic, loyal to the Magisterium. I would never do or say anything to foster or encourage dissent.
 
All these problems are avoided at my parish church. The children are encouraged to go to the front at the beginning of the Mass, the priest bestows special attention on them - blessing them I believe (I can’t see them properly) and then they get sent back to their parents.

The children sit quietly in their seats during Holy Communion, just like we did in the 195Os. The priest and EMOHCs distribute the Communion in a solemn manner.

Rove
 
I have been following this thread with interest. Aside from all of the given directives that forbid EMHC giving blessings what about the practices that really happen in parishes across the country.

I have travelled from west coast to east coast, to the northern states and the southern states and most if not all of the parishes I have attended there have been people in the communion lines crossing their arms to receive blessings.

So what are the EMHC’s to do? Tell those people, “sorry we are not allowed to give you a blessing” and turn them away, more than likely giving way to humiliation and embarrassment?

While this is a wonderful educating thread the practicality/actuality of this being changed and the rules followed, in my own personal opinion is slim. People are going up to be blessed because (I would like to believe so anyway) they are being led by their heart to be closer to God and it gives them comfort, whether it be by their Priest or by the EMHC.

I fully understand that these are the rules but those of us who are reading these threads are in the small minority from the faithful who attend Mass every Sunday to whom seeing their fellow parishioners receive a blessing is commonplace and normal.

Please be assured that I am not arguing either way, personally when I went through RCIA 9 years ago, I didn’t want to go up for a blessing, I wanted to wait for the “real deal”!

So whether I am going to get lambasted for my thoughts we will see. But that is all they are, my thoughts. I normally don’t post because things can get so heated and all rationale seems to fly out of the window sometimes.

I wish you all God’s Peace
 
I have been following this thread with interest. Aside from all of the given directives that forbid EMHC giving blessings what about the practices that really happen in parishes across the country.

I have travelled from west coast to east coast, to the northern states and the southern states and most if not all of the parishes I have attended there have been people in the communion lines crossing their arms to receive blessings.

So what are the EMHC’s to do? Tell those people, “sorry we are not allowed to give you a blessing” and turn them away, more than likely giving way to humiliation and embarrassment?

While this is a wonderful educating thread the practicality/actuality of this being changed and the rules followed, in my own personal opinion is slim. People are going up to be blessed because (I would like to believe so anyway) they are being led by their heart to be closer to God and it gives them comfort, whether it be by their Priest or by the EMHC.

I fully understand that these are the rules but those of us who are reading these threads are in the small minority from the faithful who attend Mass every Sunday to whom seeing their fellow parishioners receive a blessing is commonplace and normal.

Please be assured that I am not arguing either way, personally when I went through RCIA 9 years ago, I didn’t want to go up for a blessing, I wanted to wait for the “real deal”!

So whether I am going to get lambasted for my thoughts we will see. But that is all they are, my thoughts. I normally don’t post because things can get so heated and all rationale seems to fly out of the window sometimes.

I wish you all God’s Peace
Parrotgal, that is why this practice is so bad. We feel that those who cannot receive are somehow cheated out of something so we make up a “ritual” to offer them some sort of consolaton prize, when really, there is no point to this.

Redemptionis Sacramentum hit the nail on the head when it noted that:
11.] The Mystery of the Eucharist “is too great for anyone to permit himself to treat it according to his own whim, so that its sacredness and its universal ordering would be obscured”.27 On the contrary, anyone who acts thus by giving free rein to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved,28 and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today. Nor do such actions serve authentic pastoral care or proper liturgical renewal; instead, they deprive Christ’s faithful of their patrimony and their heritage. **For arbitrary actions are not conducive to true renewal,29 but are detrimental to the right of Christ’s faithful to a liturgical celebration that is an expression of the Church’s life in accordance with her tradition and discipline. In the end, they introduce elements of distortion and disharmony into the very celebration of the Eucharist, which is oriented in its own lofty way and by its very nature to signifying and wondrously bringing about the **communion of divine life and the unity of the People of God.30 The result is uncertainty in matters of doctrine, perplexity and scandal on the part of the People of God, and, almost as a necessary consequence, vigorous opposition, all of which greatly confuse and sadden many of Christ’s faithful in this age of ours when Christian life is often particularly difficult on account of the inroads of “secularization” as well.31
Thus, things like a blessing in lieu of distributing Holy Communion are a misguided attempt at “inclusivity”, especially since the final blessing, imparted by the celebrant at the end of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, is the most universal part of the Mass, since everyone is able to receive it, Catholic or not.

Those who continue to support it and purport this move have, in my opinion, a very poor, very inadequate, understanding of what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is and what the line for Holy Communion is. The celebrant issues the invtation after the Agnus Dei, “Behold, the Lamb of God, happy are those who are called to his supper.” When we are called to a supper, it is assumed that we are going there to eat. If you were to invite me to your house for supper, this means that I am going to eat with you. If I just show up and watch you eat, then, that makes no sense at all. If you are serving filet mignon and all I do is ask you for a picture of the meal, you would think that is rather odd, right? You would expect that I will join you in the meal and eat. The same concept applies to Holy Communion. The line is to receive and consume Someone, not receive something that cannot be consumed.

As you yourself noted, you chose not to go up for a blessing. The Lord had already planted a strong and sturdy sensus Fidei within your soul. He gave you a sense of the Faith, urging you to wait until your time had come. Would that some RCIA teams had your sense of the Faith.
 
Benedictgal
Unfortunately until there is widespread education throughout dioceses/parishes this practice will continue. And that is where my posting perspective is coming from. I will say that the EMHC’s in my old parish gave blessings but were told NOT to touch the people, and to only say “peace be with you” with their hand extended over their head. I don’t know what they do in my new parish, but they do give blessings, but I see them touching their heads which does disturb me as they use the same hand to distribute the Body of Christ!:eek:

I can’t tell you how many times I have heard the Priest tell the community (especially at a funeral or wedding) to come and receive a blessing during communion. So until our Priests are educated through our Bishops not much is going to change in this practice.🤷

As always I appreciate the wealth of information you provide on so many topics. And I understand where you are coming from.👍

God’s Peace be with you.
 
Benedictgal
Unfortunately until there is widespread education throughout dioceses/parishes this practice will continue. And that is where my posting perspective is coming from. I will say that the EMHC’s in my old parish gave blessings but were told NOT to touch the people, and to only say “peace be with you” with their hand extended over their head. I don’t know what they do in my new parish, but they do give blessings, but I see them touching their heads which does disturb me as they use the same hand to distribute the Body of Christ!:eek:

I can’t tell you how many times I have heard the Priest tell the community (especially at a funeral or wedding) to come and receive a blessing during communion. So until our Priests are educated through our Bishops not much is going to change in this practice.🤷

As always I appreciate the wealth of information you provide on so many topics. And I understand where you are coming from.👍

God’s Peace be with you.
The EMHC in my parish are instructed much like those in your old parish. They are told to say “God bless you” and not to touch or make any movement or gestures with the hand. Only at funerals and weddings, as well as Easter & Christmas, our pastor does give a little instruction before Communion informing people of who may receive Holy Communion. But he does say, “If you are not receiving Communion but would like to come forward for a blessing, please cross your arms like so.” In my opinion, this “invitation” is not meant to be an all-inclusive type of thing so no one would feel left out. It seems to be more of letting people know who may receive Communion as well as letting him know who should not be given Communion when they come forward. I have always thought this invitation would cause a little confusion if they were to someday approach an EMHC.
 
I went for EM training recently at our church and we were instructed not to bless anyone, but say “Jesus loves you” and to touch them on the shoulder with opposite hand that does not give Communion.

I find it confusing that so many parishes are doing different things.🤷

Blessings
 
I am an EM and we are told NOT to give blessings because we did not receive the Holy Orders. In case the child stands in front of you with his/her arms crossed we are told to raise our hand with our palm facing their head or forehead WITHOUT touching them and WITHOUT saying anything so the child will not be embarrassed waiting there in front of you. Our pastor provided a catechesis for 3 Sundays during homilies and the issue of “blessings by EMs” was thoroughly discussed to the community. Since then the parents and the children know that if they want blessings they should go to the priest’s line and they also understand that even if the EM raises their hand in front of them that does not mean that it is a blessing. I hope this helps.

April:)
 
The EMHC in my parish are instructed much like those in your old parish. They are told to say “God bless you” and not to touch or make any movement or gestures with the hand. Only at funerals and weddings, as well as Easter & Christmas, our pastor does give a little instruction before Communion informing people of who may receive Holy Communion. But he does say, “If you are not receiving Communion but would like to come forward for a blessing, please cross your arms like so.” In my opinion, this “invitation” is not meant to be an all-inclusive type of thing so no one would feel left out. It seems to be more of letting people know who may receive Communion as well as letting him know who should not be given Communion when they come forward. I have always thought this invitation would cause a little confusion if they were to someday approach an EMHC.
This is how it happens in our parish, too. The rules are all very well, but the pastoral value of allowing non-Catholics to take that step can be immense.

Speaking as a convert, I know how foreign Mass can seem, and how intimidating the priest. Coming forward for a blessing can be the first step in their conversion, or at the very least, of changing their view of the Church, and through them, members of their families and friends.

What harm can come from allowing non-Catholics to come forward for a blessing? ‘Well, everyone gets a blessing at the end of Mass’, a legalist will say.

But the value of a personal approach and personal involvement is immense. Did Our Lord call the Apostles individually or not? Did He give the Eucharist to them individually? Did He heal the sick one by one, or just wave a hand over them all at once?

There really is a huge danger of Phariseeism here. The value of pastoral care takes precedence over quoting from documents every time, in my opinion.
 
There really is a huge danger of Phariseeism here. The value of pastoral care takes precedence over quoting from documents every time, in my opinion.
There is great value in pastoral care. That is another reason why Catholic priests/pastors are assigned and not hired like in Protestant faith communities.

That pastoral care demands instruction for those in his care. Instruction…not mis-instruction.

Can you imagine any teacher, perhaps in Math, letting the children adapt to their own counting system or arrive at answers which they are happy with? Then you have to train them twice… to forget the wrong, and then learn the right.

Same with us… we are children in the Faith - many with a “second grade” education. RCIA often does more harm than good. And many posters here who condone the actions of personal choice - in lieu of the prescribed actions permitted by the hierarchy - are only making the problem worse.

IHMO

,
 
I am an EM and we are told NOT to give blessings because we did not receive the Holy Orders. In case the child stands in front of you with his/her arms crossed we are told to raise our hand with our palm facing their head or forehead WITHOUT touching them and WITHOUT saying anything so the child will not be embarrassed waiting there in front of you. Our pastor provided a catechesis for 3 Sundays during homilies and the issue of “blessings by EMs” was thoroughly discussed to the community. Since then the parents and the children know that if they want blessings they should go to the priest’s line and they also understand that even if the EM raises their hand in front of them that does not mean that it is a blessing. I hope this helps.

April:)
However, even at that, no one should be going to the priest’s line for a blessing, since the line is only to receive Someone, and not, something. It is as though we are telling the children, you can’t have Communion, but, you can have this instead. This is not right. The CDWDS has already given five key points as to why this should not be done.

Even what you are told to do is wrong. All that you are commissioned to do (and, this is a temporary commission) is to assist the celebrant in the distribution of Holy Communion (and only when there is a true and legitimate need). That is all.
 
This is how it happens in our parish, too. The rules are all very well, but the pastoral value of allowing non-Catholics to take that step can be immense.

Speaking as a convert, I know how foreign Mass can seem, and how intimidating the priest. Coming forward for a blessing can be the first step in their conversion, or at the very least, of changing their view of the Church, and through them, members of their families and friends.

What harm can come from allowing non-Catholics to come forward for a blessing? ‘Well, everyone gets a blessing at the end of Mass’, a legalist will say.

But the value of a personal approach and personal involvement is immense. Did Our Lord call the Apostles individually or not? Did He give the Eucharist to them individually? Did He heal the sick one by one, or just wave a hand over them all at once?

There really is a huge danger of Phariseeism here. The value of pastoral care takes precedence over quoting from documents every time, in my opinion.
Actually, if you examine Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees, it was never about the cultic worship of Ancient Israel. The Pharisees were imposing laws on the people that were meant for the priests. This imposition dates back to the Babylonian captivity when Ancient Israel, realizing that it was their fault that they were in this miss (for disobeying the cultic worship of God) decided that they needed to do more so as to keep from making the same errors.

The cultic worship of Ancient Israel was an entirely different matter altogether than what the Pharisees were doing. God spent no little amount of words dictating to Moses just how He was to be worshipped. He set down the norms for Moses and the Levite priests to follow. Jesus never argued the point about sacrificial worship since His Father was the one who set down the norms and rubrics that Jesus would wind up fulflilling with his Sacrifice on the Cross. Jesus did not change the scope of the Passover meal at the Last Supper. He was the Paschal Lamb, as the rituals all pointed out to Him. Thus, if we hold your argument to be true, then Jesus would have been contradicting God the Father. Please do not confuse Jesus’ dealings with the Pharisees and the cultic worship of ancient Israel.

The Church is the New Israel. She continues the Sacred Sacrifice of Her Lord and Spouse. As such, she does not make arbitrary changes to the norms of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

With all due respect, I would suggest that you read what the authoriative documents of the Church have to say about what goes on in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. As I read your comments, you seem to disregard the notion that the final blessing is something important. Furthermore, the celebrant (nor even the bishop, for that matter) has any right ot add anything or impose an additonal ritual into the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. If folks are so inclined to want a blessing from the priest, nothing precludes them from asking him or the deacon to do so after Mass.
 
With all due respect, you can repost your response as many times as you please, but, it only serves to contradict your answer. Furthermore, the fact that the document has a protocol number, which you posted, makes it a legitimate and bona fide, binding and authoritative document of the Holy See.

Again, the catechism is a teaching document of the Church, while RS, the GIRM and the letter from the CDWDS are regulatory documents.

The link that you posted is merely an interpretation of the document. Fr. David, as a priest, has made valid points. Furthermore, all of the supporting documentation that we have used in this thread is further ratified and confirmed in the CDWDS letter, which, as I read your posts, you are quick to disregard and ignore.
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments replied and said “The letter said that “this matter is presently under the attentive study of the Congregation”, so “for the present, **this dicastery wishes to limit itself **to the following observations”: . To date we find a few individuals who openly choose to deny this actual response.

It is one thing to personally deny the actual writing it is a totally different issue to hide and or misrepresent the issue to other catholics. If you read the thread you will see words as “illicit”, and “abuse” these words are not in the letter or from The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments yet catholics are lead to believe that. Further the contridiction of “**this dicastery wishes to limit itself **” combined with the individuals teaching the practice is banded is being hidden from these catholics being taught. And a straight forward hypocrisy exists to teach bullet #2 is to be applied as written with out need of context or pretex, while bullet #5 must never be considered the same, in fact bullet #5 most be mostly ignored!
 
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments replied and said “The letter said that “this matter is presently under the attentive study of the Congregation”, so “for the present, **this dicastery wishes to limit itself **to the following observations”: . To date we find a few individuals who openly choose to deny this actual response.

It is one thing to personally deny the actual writing it is a totally different issue to hide and or misrepresent the issue to other catholics. If you read the thread you will see words as “illicit”, and “abuse” these words are not in the letter or from The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments yet catholics are lead to believe that. Further the contridiction of “**this dicastery wishes to limit itself **” combined with the individuals teaching the practice is banded is being hidden from these catholics being taught. And a straight forward hypocrisy exists to teach bullet #2 is to be applied as written with out need of context or pretex, while bullet #5 must never be considered the same, in fact bullet #5 most be mostly ignored!
You are the one who is misrepresenting the issue, I am afraid. As I read what you have posted, you seem to pick and choose what you think is applicable, while ignoring the entire statement. There is no hypocrisy from the CDWDS document. With all due respect, you are the one twisting it because you cannot seem to get past the first line and move on to what the entire document says. This, as I see it, is misleading the faithful, since all of the supporting documentation from the authoritative documents of the Holy See confirm the line of thought regarding these so-called blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion.

Rather than resort to name-calling and misrepresentation, I ask you to read the CDWDS document as well as all of the other documents and authoritative statements of the Holy See together. The dots do connect.
 
You are the one who is misrepresenting the issue, I am afraid. As I read what you have posted, you seem to pick and choose what you think is applicable, while ignoring the entire statement. There is no hypocrisy from the CDWDS document. With all due respect, you are the one twisting it because you cannot seem to get past the first line and move on to what the entire document says. This, as I see it, is misleading the faithful, since all of the supporting documentation from the authoritative documents of the Holy See confirm the line of thought regarding these so-called blessings in lieu of distributing Holy Communion.

Rather than resort to name-calling and misrepresentation, I ask you to read the CDWDS document as well as all of the other documents and authoritative statements of the Holy See together. The dots do connect.
:tsktsk:
 
Please remember, everyone, to keep the discussion civil and without any personal comments. Thank you all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top