Going to Communion

[FrDavid96]

Fr. David, could elaborate? Because I too myself have seen announcements…and no announcements. And i have seen lay people say something such as “May God Bless you”

There seems to be much confusion around this issue.

By now, I’m sure you’ve read the letter from the Holy See. No priest, and even no bishop has the authority to over-turn the Holy See (except the Pope himself).

If we have a conflict between announcements made before Mass on the one hand, and liturgical directives from the Holy See on the other hand, (which is what we have here) we follow the Holy See. The letter is quite clear, blessings at Communion are not to be done.

 

[japhy]

So now we are relying on a letter to “Japhy” here at CA forums rather than our bishops?

Does it help if we use the name “Jeffrey Pinyan” instead?

Why is the diocesan bishop the authority for determining whether or not the blessing may be given?

 

[FrDavid96]

So now we are relying on a letter to “Japhy” here at CA forums rather than our bishops? Really?

It isn’t not about who the letter is to.

It is about who the letter is from.

The letter is from the Holy See, which has the final say.

So the answer to your question is yes.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

By now, I’m sure you’ve read the letter from the Holy See. No priest, and even no bishop has the authority to over-turn the Holy See (except the Pope himself).

If we have a conflict between announcements made before Mass on the one hand, and liturgical directives from the Holy See on the other hand, (which is what we have here) we follow the Holy See. The letter is quite clear, blessings at Communion are not to be done.

Well…I am a little confused because it looks like the letter is talking about a laying on of hands or a formal sign of the cross blessing but doesn’t distinguish someone saying may God Bless you. Directives like that are hard seem hard for some of us to understand unless you are versed in the language or are a lawyer.

What should a priest do or a EMHC if someone presents themself? Turn them away? Which then begs the other question…what would you do if you know someone is divorced and remarried without an annulment? This would be a real question for me someday because I know that my dad is remarried and my stepmom was divorced but refuses the annulment process…we have had discussions about this. And yet they still present themselves for communion.

 

[japhy]

it looks like the letter is talking about a laying on of hands or a formal sign of the cross blessing but doesn’t distinguish someone saying may God Bless you.

The third point of the response, about the “laying on of a hand or hands” is prefaced by “furthermore”. The second point of the response make it clear that a lay person is unable to confer a blessing on someone at Mass, and the third point specifically mentions one means by which a person might attempt to bestow a blessing.

What should a priest do or a EMHC if someone presents themself?

That is what the document does not say. It doesn’t say what to do if someone does present himself for a blessing. It does say that a blessing is not to be given. Perhaps saying “God bless you” is sufficient and appropriate. But it’s clear that the document discourages both the giving of blessings and the approaching for a blessing.

Those who are divorced and remarried should not present themselves for Holy Communion. If they do, and the minister of Holy Communion is aware of their situation, the minister should not communicate them. The matter should be addressed privately and pastorally.

 

[FrDavid96]

Well…I am a little confused because it looks like the letter is talking about a laying on of hands or a formal sign of the cross blessing but doesn’t distinguish someone saying may God Bless you. Directives like that are hard seem hard for some of us to understand unless you are versed in the language or are a lawyer.

What should a priest do or a EMHC if someone presents themself? Turn them away? Which then begs the other question…what would you do if you know someone is divorced and remarried without an annulment? This would be a real question for me someday because I know that my dad is remarried and my stepmom was divorced but refuses the annulment process…we have had discussions about this. And yet they still present themselves for communion.

Actually, it does. It just doesn’t say it directly. Here’s what the text says:
In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing.

Let’s break that down.

“others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law” means anyone (yes, anyone) who is “not to be admitted.” That means children who have not received First Communion, and even Catholics who have not kept the Eucharistic fast, even if they’re good and faithful Catholics. Of course, it means non-Catholics and Catholics in an irregular marriage.

“the Church’s discipline has already been made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion” means that they shouldn’t be in the Communion line in the first place. That’s pretty straightforward, but still it doesn’t stop people from trying to change it.

“nor receive a blessing” means just that. Not receive a blessing. A pseudo-blessing is even worse. It’s like someone saying “I can’t bless you, but there’s nothing saying I can’t pretend to bless you.”

As for the second half of your post, that’s a question which should be addressed to your pastor. Priests cannot admit certain people to Communion. Priests know this. But at the same time, priests also have access to confidential information that isn’t public knowledge. Purely by way of example, if someone who isn’t eligible to receive goes to Confession just before Mass, the priest obviously isn’t going to make a public announcement “so and so can now receive” If people who shouldn’t be receiving Communion are doing so, this needs to be brought to the attention of the pastor (in the right way) and from then on, it’s his responsibility to make things right. First and foremost, it’s the pastor’s responsibility to make sure that his parishioners know who can and cannot receive Communion.

 

[FAB]

Nope, and here’s a letter from Rome that says so.

And no, it’s not ever “pastoral” to break the rules (give blessings at communion time, especially for lay people), just in case anyone was going to say so.

Here’s the letter written to Rome by the CAF user Japhy (and one other):

And the response from Rome:

The response is also in the attached PDF.

Once again as repeated a number of times on these forums, this is letter does not have the effect of law in the Church. The decision on this matter is up to the local ordinary. If he allows the practice, there is no futher aurgument.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

“the Church’s discipline has already been made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion” means that they shouldn’t be in the Communion line in the first place. That’s pretty straightforward, but still it doesn’t stop people from trying to change it.

.

Hmmm…but if you are non-Catholic and you hear an announcement such as the OP said…how would you know? It seems to me that here the Church’s discipline is NOT clear…

I’m not sure what to do if I become an EMHC and my parents present themselves…they know the rules…and when you see so many politicians receiving communion when they shouldn’t be doing so…am I to have that tussel with them…especially when its not their normal parish?

 

[jmcrae]

I ask this not for a tussel…but a lot of those people that go up are in fact new to the church and may not know.

No one would ever think of doing this, on their own - it’s not like someone would just randomly join the Communion line up thinking it was a place to receive a blessing from a priest or lay person.

It is only because well-meaning people keep inviting them to do it, that they keep doing it.

If people stopped inviting them to do it, they would stop doing it.

Or if people did what one EMHC did, when I (having been told to do this by a well-meaning friend) presented myself for a blessing one time, a few years before I became Catholic - I had my arms crossed and I said, “May I have your blessing,” to the EMHC, and she said, “No. I am not authorized to give blessings.” That worked, too.

 

[FrDavid96]

Once again as repeated a number of times on these forums, this is letter does not have the effect of law in the Church. The decision on this matter is up to the local ordinary. If he allows the practice, there is no futher aurgument.

Not true. In fact, the exact opposite is true.

The letter does indeed have the effect of law in the Church. I suggest you read canon 16 which contradicts what you posted above.

Canon 135 §2. Legislative power must be exercised in the manner prescribed by law; that which a legislator below the supreme authority possesses in the Church cannot be validly delegated unless the law explicitly provides otherwise. A lower legislator cannot validly issue a law contrary to higher law.

Can. 360 The Supreme Pontiff usually conducts the affairs of the universal Church through the Roman Curia which performs its function in his name and by his authority for the good and service of the churches. The Roman Curia consists of the Secretariat of State or the Papal Secretariat, the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church, congregations, tribunals, and other institutes; the constitution and competence of all these are defined in special law.

Can. 361 In this Code, the term Apostolic See or Holy See refers not only to the Roman Pontiff but also to the Secretariat of State, the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church, and other institutes of the Roman Curia, unless it is otherwise apparent from the nature of the matter or the context of the words.

Can. 16 §1. The legislator authentically interprets laws as does the one to whom the same legislator has entrusted the power of authentically interpreting.

§2. **An authentic interpretation put forth in the form of law has the same force as the law itself **and must be promulgated. If it only declares the words of the law which are certain in themselves, it is retroactive; if it restricts or extends the law, or if it explains a doubtful law, it is not retroactive.

The Holy See decides what happens/doesn’t happen at Mass. It’s not up to the local ordinary because the local ordinary (while certainly being the chief liturgist of his diocese), does not have the authority to over-rule the Holy See. It is the role of the local ordinary to implement the liturgical laws which the Holy See alone has the authority to change.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Hmmm…but if you are non-Catholic and you hear an announcement such as the OP said…how would you know? It seems to me that here the Church’s discipline is NOT clear…

The Chruch’s discipline is clear. Its the parish thats muddling it.

I’m not sure what to do if I become an EMHC and my parents present themselves…they know the rules…and when you see so many politicians receiving communion when they shouldn’t be doing so…am I to have that tussel with them…especially when its not their normal parish?

I’ve seen EMHC’s at least direct those asking for a blessing to approach the priest. It may not be the correct answer, but its better than them giving a blessing they can never give.

 

[Spirithound]

But if someone goes up…is during communion the time for a tussel? What happens if someone who doesn’t know better walks up for a blessing?

In a more long-term view, this would be cause for more catechesis by the priest.

 

[Vince1022]

But if someone goes up…is during communion the time for a tussel? What happens if someone who doesn’t know better walks up for a blessing?

Yes of course, Communion is not a time for a tussle (as you say…not exactly sure what that means…but oh well).

If anyone walks up to communion, but does not receive, then they should proceed back to their place in the assembly (similar to how those who do receive communion do).

How is this different then someone who goes up for communion who you know is divorced and remarried without an annulment?

The difference is obvious, as you note. On one hand, you have someone you know is divorced and remarried without an annulment. On the other hand, you have someone who is not that.

Sorry. What is your question or point? I don’t see how that relates to this Thread. I didn’t see anything in the original post that referred to issues of divorce/remarriage and communion, so if you have a question on that it would seem more appropriate to start a new thread.

 

[Vince1022]

If there’s one thing the letter steadfastly avoids saying, it’s that. In fact, it confirms that the issue is “presently under the attentive study of the Congregation,” i.e. that it has not been definitively settled. The letter says that blessings shouldn’t be given by laypeople, shouldn’t be given by laying on of hands, shouldn’t be given to remarried people, and so on, but you can see how that’s just a way of talking around the issue of whether a blessing at Communion should ever be given (by a priest).

When they want to say that no such blessings may be given, they are free to say “No such blessings may be given.” Until then, you have a situation where the Congregation was asked, “These blessings are going on regularly. What do you have to say about that?”, and they opted to answer, “Well, it shouldn’t be given by laypersons, it shouldn’t be given to people in manifest sin, etc.”

I’m just going by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal and all other teachings from the Church. I have not found anywhere that prescribes or allows individual blessings as part of the celebration of the Mass.

If some parishes or people choose to do such, my main point is that they are adding something to the Mass. Such additions may or may not be appropriate.

 

[Vince1022]

By now, I’m sure you’ve read the letter from the Holy See.

I may have missed something on this thread…sorry…what letter are you referring to? thanks! Just trying to keep up with things.

 

[Vince1022]

Sure, that’s your interpretation of what it means to “add something to the Mass.” It’s not an interpretation the Church has yet adopted, though, and frankly I doubt that they will. Of course, if your interpretation were as obvious as you think, I’m sure the Congregation’s letter would have said, “You dolt! It’s an illicit addition to the Mass, so obviously it’s not allowed at all! Duh!” That’d be a very easy way to clear up the whole issue, wouldn’t it?

And to take a perhaps similar matter, there is no line in the Missal permitting priests to ask EMHCs to use hand sanitizer before helping distribute Communion – but I don’t think many people would be up for defending the proposition that, if the use of sanitizer is to be prohibited, it’s on the naked force of that general line from Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Apples and oranges.

Sanitizing one’s hand is not a theological or liturgical principle.

Giving communion, or a blessing, are.

The Church regulates the latter, appropriately. Not the former.

 

[FrDavid96]

I may have missed something on this thread…sorry…what letter are you referring to? thanks! Just trying to keep up with things.

It’s right here in post #3 forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7440672&postcount=3

It’s been the core of this whole thread, so I’m not sure how you missed it.

Just helping to keep you up to date.

 

[Vince1022]

It’s right here in post #3 forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7440672&postcount=3

It’s been the core of this whole thread, so I’m not sure how you missed it.

Just helping to keep you up to date.

Thanks.

So, as I thought, no one should come up for an individual blessing at Mass.

 

[Poeticlicense]

I have a question which I hope that someone will be able to help me with. My divorced spouse is living with the woman whom he committed adultery and left me for. She just converted to the Catholic faith and received her Holy communion. They both receive the sacrament of the Eucharist and have even done so this past Easter in front of myself and our children at the church that my divorced spouse and I were parishioners together prior to the divorce. My divorced spouse’s girlfriend has stated to me that their Priest and Deacon have discussed it with them amd that they are allowed to take communion as long as they are “at peace with it in their hearts” which is the internal forum answer, which as I understand it is against canon law and their priest and deacon have discussed their future marriage and that his vasectomy will not be an impediment to it, even though our marriage is still valid. He has filed for an annulment but I only received the citation a week ago and I intend to contest it. From what I understand, the priest and deacon should not be allowing them to have communion or discussing marriage with them until and IF our marriage is declared invalid. I feel betrayed that their priest and deacon are doing this. Aren’t they delict of God’s law and Canon law? How would I go about asking the Bishop? To request that this stop?

 

[ConstantineTG]

I have a question which I hope that someone will be able to help me with. My divorced spouse is living with the woman whom he committed adultery and left me for. She just converted to the Catholic faith and received her Holy communion. They both receive the sacrament of the Eucharist and have even done so this past Easter in front of myself and our children at the church that my divorced spouse and I were parishioners together prior to the divorce. My divorced spouse’s girlfriend has stated to me that their Priest and Deacon have discussed it with them amd that they are allowed to take communion as long as they are “at peace with it in their hearts” which is the internal forum answer, which as I understand it is against canon law and their priest and deacon have discussed their future marriage and that his vasectomy will not be an impediment to it, even though our marriage is still valid. He has filed for an annulment but I only received the citation a week ago and I intend to contest it. From what I understand, the priest and deacon should not be allowing them to have communion or discussing marriage with them until and IF our marriage is declared invalid. I feel betrayed that their priest and deacon are doing this. Aren’t they delict of God’s law and Canon law? How would I go about asking the Bishop? To request that this stop?

To be frank, it is none of your business. Why are you even affected by it? Move on. Them receiving the Sacraments is between them, their priest, and God. You do not know what the state of their souls are. Focus on your own sins and your own salvation.