Is it proper to go up for a blessing when not receiving Communion?

[FrDavid96]

I don’t understand why the priest does not make it known what the custom is at the parish before the Mass begins. I mean, how difficult would that be to do?
…

I understand what you’re saying, but the Mass is not a matter of following “parish custom”

It might be necessary to explain that those who are visitors and are not Catholic cannot receive Communion (especially at weddings and funerals). The solution is rather simple. End such an announcement by saying “therefore if you are not receiving Communion, for whatever reason, please do not come forward in the line.” Problem solved.

 

[grandfather]

I don’t understand why the priest does not make it known what the custom is at the parish before the Mass begins. I mean, how difficult would that be to do?

Our pastor makes sure an announcement is made: if you are not a Catholic in complete communion with The Church, or you are not a Christian, you may approach the PRIEST OR THE DEACON for a blessing…not a ‘head rubbing’ (I have no idea what that is) but a BLESSING…going to a Eucharistic Minister who is NOT a Deacon or a Priest would not get you a priestly blessing.

Jeesh…as my dear late dad would say, some people need to use their heads for something other than holding their ears apart.

He would say that…not me, of course…by golly, let’s keep this controversy going because, after all, it is important…

next…

The priest has no authority to give any instructions that are contrary to the norms and directives that come from the Universal Church. A local priest may assume such authority, but if he does he is acting alone, outside of the authority given to him by the Church. If he instructs people to do what is improper regarding this topic or any other, under the guise of priestly authority, he is a rebel, disobedient, causes scandal.

Protestant churches may develop and practice local customs. Catholic parishes can not make up their own liturgies and liturgical norms. Suppose some priest decided it would be nice to dye the host blue, or red white and blue for forth of July. Suppose he decided he would consecrate whole wheat honey homemade bread, because he “felt” it taste better. Suppose he wanted to have his pet poodle on the altar with him. Guess which two of these have actually happened not that far from where I live. Does the fact that these things are customary in some parish make them legitimate or proper?

 

[brigid12]

I would guess that this practice got started due to parents with small children needing to bring them with them to the front in order to receive and the priests not wanting to “ignore” the little ones. It would have then blossomed to adults who were not able to receive for one reason or another.
I don’t see anything wrong with it, as long as those coming up for the blessing (or parents with small children) only use a priest’s or deacon’s communion line and it is not noted in the GIRM as something Rome doesn’t want non-communicants to do during Holy Communion. The EO have a somewhat similar practice (providing unconsecrated bread to those not in communion with their Church) so that even though their communion is closed also, they are able to show charity to those not able to receive. I like that.

 

[wcknight]

Personally, I don’t think it is such a negative deal. I’d rather have them come up with hands crossed for a blessing than have them take Communion even though they are not Catholic. Eventually they may want to become Catholic merely because they see that the Body and Blood of Christ are not available to them as non-Catholics.

There are many cases of folks becoming Catholic because they come to believe as we do that Communion IS the Body and Blood of Christ. Maybe coming up to Communion for a blessing helps to drive that home.

When my kids were very little I used to bring them up to Communion all the time, I believe is it very important for kids to feel they are a part of the entire mass.

 

[benedictgal]

The priest has no authority to give any instructions that are contrary to the norms and directives that come from the Universal Church. A local priest may assume such authority, but if he does he is acting alone, outside of the authority given to him by the Church. If he instructs people to do what is improper regarding this topic or any other, under the guise of priestly authority, he is a rebel, disobedient, causes scandal.

Protestant churches may develop and practice local customs. Catholic parishes can not make up their own liturgies and liturgical norms. Suppose some priest decided it would be nice to dye the host blue, or red white and blue for forth of July. Suppose he decided he would consecrate whole wheat honey homemade bread, because he “felt” it taste better. Suppose he wanted to have his pet poodle on the altar with him. Guess which two of these have actually happened not that far from where I live. Does the fact that these things are customary in some parish make them legitimate or proper?

Unfortunately, there may be those who have forgotten what the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy has to say when it notes that:

“Therefore no other person whatsoever, not even a priest, may add, remove or change anything in the Liturgy on their own authority” [SC 22: 3].

Furthermore, there seems to be this misguided notion that everyone must either be doing something or receiving Someone/something in order to actively participate in the Mass. That is a miguided attempt at interpreting what “active participation” means.

To quote Archbishop Rajith:

The Pope in his book “The Spirit of the Liturgy” defines Actuosa Participatio as a call to a total assimilation in the very action of Christ the High Priest. It is in no way a call to activism, a misunderstanding that spread widely in the aftermath of
“Sacrosanctum Concilium”. Stated Cardinal Ratzinger: “what does it [active participation] mean ….? Unfortunately the word was very quickly misunderstood to mean something external, entailing a need for general activity, as if as many people as possible, as often as possible, should be visibly engaged in action”

As I noted in a previous, there is no precedent for having to get up and receive a blessing in lieu of Holy Communion. The early Church certainly understood the reason why people got up to receive Our Lord and why those who were not fully initiated could not.

 

[Newbie2]

“Children’s church” is a Protestant idea.

Is that anything like “children’s liturgy”, like what we have at our parish where the K-3 kids go into the chapel for a children’s explanation of the gospel?

 

[benedictgal]

Personally, I don’t think it is such a negative deal. I’d rather have them come up with hands crossed for a blessing than have them take Communion even though they are not Catholic. Eventually they may want to become Catholic merely because they see that the Body and Blood of Christ are not available to them as non-Catholics.

There are many cases of folks becoming Catholic because they come to believe as we do that Communion IS the Body and Blood of Christ. Maybe coming up to Communion for a blessing helps to drive that home.

When my kids were very little I used to bring them up to Communion all the time, I believe is it very important for kids to feel they are a part of the entire mass.

But, recall, too, that the act of receiving Holy Communion is the actual participation in the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. It is reserved only for Catholics who are properly disposed.

The notion of standing up in line to receive a blessing distorts the notion of what this particular time in the Mass is all about. It is not about merely standing up and being a part of the crowd and receiving Someone (or something).

At the invitation for Communion, the priest says, “Happy are those who are called to His Supper.” If I am going to invite you to supper, I am assuming that you are going to eat (and drink). You aren’t going to show up at my house and just shake my hand and watch me eat. An invitation to supper presupposes that you are going to share in the meal. The Roman Missal invites the faithful who are properly disposed to share in the Sacrificial Meal. It doesn’t invite those who cannot to receive a blessing. That is why the proper thing to do is for those who cannot receive Holy Communion to remain in their pews and enter into a Spiritual Communion with Our Lord until such time as they are able to come forward to receive Him.

 

[benedictgal]

Is that anything like “children’s liturgy”, like what we have at our parish where the K-3 kids go into the chapel for a children’s explanation of the gospel?

This is found in the Directory for Masses with Children. If I understand Brother Rich correctly, he is perpahs referring to an inappropriate term. Incidentally, the kids do come back for the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

 

[Newbie2]

This is found in the Directory for Masses with Children. If I understand Brother Rich correctly, he is perpahs referring to an inappropriate term. Incidentally, the kids do come back for the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

You mean that the kids come back in time for the LOTE in Children’s Liturgy, right?

 

[FrDavid96]

You mean that the kids come back in time for the LOTE in Children’s Liturgy, right?

Not quite. In a children’s liturgy, all (or most) of those present are in fact children. That’s the only way a children’t liturgy can happen.

It is acceptable for the children to leave the regular parish Mass for instruction during the Liturgy of the Word and then return to the Mass for the rest of it. Personally, I don’t like it, but that’s how it works. The children do not leave the Mass for a “children’s liturgy” this is an example of the parish using an incorrect terminology.

 

[Newbie2]

What is the correct terminology?

 

[FrDavid96]

What is the correct terminology?

See the “Directory for Masses with Children”
It’s not a “children’s Mass” it is a Mass in which children participate. The point is that there is only one “Mass” there is not a “children’s Mass” and an “adult’s Mass” there is one Mass and that Mass might be attended by different groups of people. There might well be more than one Mass on a given Sunday, but there is no “teen Mass” or “old peoples Mass” there is “the” Mass and it happens to be attended by different people.

If you start with the parish Mass (attended by a range of age-groups) it is possible to have the children leave the Mass for the Liturgy of the Word and have their own Liturgy of the Word seperate from the adults. When the Liturgy of the Eucharist begins, the children return to the Mass (“already in progress”).

 

[Newbie2]

Actually, what I’m asking for is the correct term for what we call in our parish “Children’s Liturgy”, where the kids go into the Chapel for their version of the liturgy (dumbed down ) and then come back in for the rest of the mass, as you said “already in session”.

 

[benedictgal]

Actually, what I’m asking for is the correct term for what we call in our parish “Children’s Liturgy”, where the kids go into the Chapel for their version of the liturgy (dumbed down ) and then come back in for the rest of the mass, as you said “already in session”.

It’s the Children’s Liturgy of the Word, for lack of a better term. Having done those a couple of times, I think it’s better just to have them sit with the grown-ups and then encourage the parents to engage in a conversation with them about what they just heard. Sometimes the message these kids receive from well-meaning adults may not necessarily be correct.

Look at this thread.

 

[Newbie2]

No doubt.

Not to mention just last week two adults, presumably a husband and wife went in with the kids, and talked to each other while my wife was trying to explain the Gospel to the kids. At the kids knew when to keep quiet and listen…

 

[FrDavid96]

Actually, what I’m asking for is the correct term for what we call in our parish “Children’s Liturgy”, where the kids go into the Chapel for their version of the liturgy (dumbed down ) and then come back in for the rest of the mass, as you said “already in session”.

If they call it the “children’s liturgy” that’s not a big deal. My point is not necessarily to get into the terminology (in spite of the fact that it may appear that way).

You mean that the kids come back in time for the LOTE in Children’s Liturgy, right?

Your post made it look like you were saying that in the Children’s Liturgy they are seperated from the adults for the Lit. of the Eucharist–that’s whay I was trying to address. It appeared that you were saying that sarcastically to say that the children have a seperate Lit of Euch. Apparently not. Other more important matters to discuss; no point in dragging this one on.

 

[vocatio]

First, are you a priest FrDavid?

Second, at what point does the laity disobey their pastor’s direction?

I would love to debate many things that go on behind the scenes on the diocese level. Howver, to do so would become very scandalous. Look what’s happening with the bishops right now.

I’ve know many priests in my life and many of them don’t agree. Look at the knock down drag out fights between the Dominicans and the Jesuits * that argued over spiritualities. The pope finally told them to basically shut up that both of them were right. I can’t remember off the top of my head what the fuss was. But I’ve posted on it in the past. Currently I’m in shock at all the gay/lesbian protesting/abortion and all that looks like is about to be pulled out from under out shoes. I fought to “protect” this country USA and all it did was give unscrupulous people in all levels of life a license to do what ever they wanted. I’m sorry, but passing a blessing on that is supposed to be from the church community -not the person- is trite in comparison to many other abuses I see…like changing word in the mass. That irritates me much more than the strange act of rubbing someone’s head justified for several reasons.

The blessing comment I made is a direct quote from my pastor. If he’s wrong I will need to hear it from the bishop. No offense, as far as anyone knows you may be a loony toon. Until I know otherwise, I have to take things with a grain of salt. I believe the blessing thing is an abuse. But how does a nobody change it… by respectfully approaching the pastor and then the bishop. Since I would like to become a deacon one day I would rather be the student than the instructor to the bishop or the priest. Obedience, you even, if a laity, should know that is important.*

 

[Newbie2]

If they call it the “children’s liturgy” that’s not a big deal. My point is not necessarily to get into the terminology (in spite of the fact that it may appear that way).

Your post made it look like you were saying that in the Children’s Liturgy they are seperated from the adults for the Lit. of the Eucharist–that’s whay I was trying to address. It appeared that you were saying that sarcastically to say that the children have a seperate Lit of Euch. Apparently not. Other more important matters to discuss; no point in dragging this one on.

Sarcastic…moi? Not in this thread, anyway.

My bad if it appeared that way to you.

 

[benedictgal]

I believe the language is the issue. I don’t believe that I couild give the same blessing as a priest and deacon if faculties were given. Howver, I know that a father and mother can bless their children. I don’t agree with blessing people in the mass. But until I am directed to do otherwise. I’ve brought this up with my pastor before. They go through the entire rigamaroar of telling people not to receive communion if they are not Catholic by explaining that “if you wish to receive a blessing then place your right hand over your chest like this”. I’ve gotten bent over things in the past that turn out to be okay. Giving a blessing to me is much less of a problem than allowing women to be up on the altar. That is so so so offbase from where I came from. Readings should be done by at least men and preferrably men considering the priesthood and if not them then younger men still thinking about seminary.

Howver, until my bishop tells me otherwise I have no course except to cringe and obey. I’ve been wrong before. Nothing new under the son. But blessing your own children goes well beyond the Catholic faith. I offered someone a way of just dealing with it. Most of us don’t want to rock the boat and it is rediculous for someone to rock the boat when they can’t get everything right all of the time.

However, you are not obligated to obey somone if the authority (in this case the bishop) instructs you to go against the authoritative documents of the Holy See. The bishop would be overstating his authority, especially when the documents, especially RS and the 1997 document issued by the Congregation for Clergy, specifically state that an EMHC cannot do something that is reserved only to the priest within the context of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Remember, too, that the important phrase is “within the context of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” My grandma used to give me a blessing before I wnet on a trip. It was her custom. However, it had nothing to do with the liturgy. But, she knew full well that any blessings within the Mass must only come from the celebrant. Even the deacon can’t impart a blessing during the Mass, only the celebrant. Furthermore, even in a Mass with a lot of concelebrants, the only one who imparts the fianl blessing is the prinicple celebrant. Just watch a Papal Mass the next time it is broadcast. You don’t see the bishops standing up and moving their arms in blessing, just the Holy Father. Of course, the main concelebrants will join him at the altar for the EP, but, that is another matter altogether.

 

[FrDavid96]

I believe the language is the issue. I don’t believe that I couild give the same blessing as a priest and deacon if faculties were given. Howver, I know that a father and mother can bless their children. I don’t agree with blessing people in the mass. But until I am directed to do otherwise. I’ve brought this up with my pastor before. They go through the entire rigamaroar of telling people not to receive communion if they are not Catholic by explaining that “if you wish to receive a blessing then place your right hand over your chest like this”. I’ve gotten bent over things in the past that turn out to be okay. Giving a blessing to me is much less of a problem than allowing women to be up on the altar. That is so so so offbase from where I came from. Readings should be done by at least men and preferrably men considering the priesthood and if not them then younger men still thinking about seminary.

Howver, until my bishop tells me otherwise I have no course except to cringe and obey. I’ve been wrong before. Nothing new under the son. But blessing your own children goes well beyond the Catholic faith. I offered someone a way of just dealing with it. Most of us don’t want to rock the boat and it is rediculous for someone to rock the boat when they can’t get everything right all of the time.

Parents cannot “bless” their children or anyone else. They can say a prayer for the children. Sometimes we use this word “bless” in a very general way, and there’s not necessarily anything wrong with that. The problem arises when we think that parents in that situation are indeed “blessing.”

The one word bless can have different meanings. A supervisor in a factory can “give his blessing” to a new safety regulation. We all know that’s not the same thing as what we’re talking about.

The distinction to keep in mind is that parents may offer prayers for children, but cannot “bless” them in the proper sense of the word. Likewise, EMHCs cannot bless anyone. The problem here is that given the context of the situation, it is very easy for people to misunderstand and think they the EMHCs are “blessing people”.