priest shoved host in my mouth....

[CuriousInIL]

My understanding is that the OP needed to go to confession before he received accidentally, so he would still need to go. Since he is going anyway, there is no harm in mentioning what happened–if nothing else, it might get back to the priest in question and the situation might be avoided in the future.

–Jen

The bolded part should not happen because of the seal of confession. The confessor could not share that with the priest at issue.

 

[JGMendes4049]

This is the official letter with protocol number sent from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (CDWDS), a Roman dicastery that has the authority of the Holy Father.

I have just found out that it is permiited in England and Wales:

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, "Celebrating the Mass: A Pastoral Introduction (2008)

“Even though some in the assembly may not receive ‘sacramental’ Communion, all are united in some way by the Holy Spirit. The Traditional idea of spiritual communion is an important one to remember and re-affirm. The invitation often given at Mass to those who may not receive sacramental communion — for example, children before their first communion and adults who are not Catholics — to receive a ‘blessing’ at the moment of Communion emphasizes that a deep spiritual communion is possible even when we do not share together the Sacrament of the Body and blood of Christ”

Is this the document to which you are referring? I see no recognitio from the CDWDS. Therefore, it is not binding. This is similar to the document of the USCCB, Sing to the Lord.

Thank you for helpfully providing the link. We can now see from this that this advice was given in a private letter, is not a norm and has no legal standing, but it is suggested that it can be taken into account. How people here have then gone on to use this as authority to say that blessings are not permitted is very disingenuous.

Actually, it is an official letter with a protocol number. It is binding.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Part of the problem is that sometimes people who wish to receive on the tongue will cross their arms/hands on their chest sometimes priests can be confused as to what the person wants (blessing or communion).

As to why priests and bishops do it and invite people to come forward for it is pretty simple: its an attempt to reduce the number of people receiving communion when they shouldn’t.
Protestants, nonChristians, and Catholics canonically ineligible to receive sometimes get whisked into the communion line and then end up receiving communion in the ensuing confusion. The blessing process is meant to reduce/eliminate the possibility of someone receiving communion who shouldn’t.

As of now the Vatican seems to occasionally officially discourage it but has never gone out of its way to stop it.

 

[Nelka]

Very true, it’s the same in my (UK) parish. I think it must be permitted by the English Bishops but not by those in the USA,

We were always told if you were going up for a blessing to stand in front of the priest with your arms crossed against your chest so the priest would know you are just having a blessing.

 

[Tigg]

I completely agree with you.

I am frankly tired of ambiguous documents.

I think the confusion (and blame) lies with the fact that our bishops clearly do not agree with each other. Not only that, but they are not always united with one heart and mind to the Holy See. Then we, the laity, try to interpret documents without the necessary theological background. No wonder we know not what to do!

We moved to this diocese about four years ago. Imagine my surprise to find out the bishop here had instructed the faithful to do the orans position during certain parts of the liturgy - exactly opposite of what we were told from where we moved. Does a faithful Catholic need to be a canon lawyer anymore to be obedient to the Church?

 

[A_G]

I’m puzzled - why should the OP have to go to confession? They did nothing wrong voluntarily. As he said, he could hardly spit the Host out. OP. perhaps another time make more of bending your head and avoiding eye-contact? Perhaps it was that which confused the priest.

I said they should go to confession because the OP said they haven’t been to confession recently, and they didn’t feel they should take Communion at that moment… so while being in confession, maybe they could also tell the priest about what happened on the Communion line in the meantime…

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I think the confusion (and blame) lies with the fact that our bishops clearly do not agree with each other. Not only that, but they are not always united with one heart and mind to the Holy See. Then we, the laity, try to interpret documents without the necessary theological background. No wonder we know not what to do!

We moved to this diocese about four years ago. Imagine my surprise to find out the bishop here had instructed the faithful to do the orans position during certain parts of the liturgy - exactly opposite of what we were told from where we moved. Does a faithful Catholic need to be a canon lawyer anymore to be obedient to the Church?

Exactly! At our parish…and most of the diocese…blessings at communion are done. It’s usually announced at the beginning of the Mass about blessings. Not feeling like it’s forbidden…it’s not one of those things I feel called to fight. My husband, upon converting, loved the blessing. It doesn’t confer anything to anyone…those that are divorced that go up for the blessing…no one thinks that they are in full communion with the Church:shrug: In my opinion…they miss out on the best part…a blessing is nice…but NOTHING substitutes for the Eucharist!

 

[JGMendes4049]

I completely agree with you.

I am frankly tired of ambiguous documents.

This.

 

[Monica4316]

I was at mass this past Sunday and my daughter, who is not old enough to recieve, wanted to go up and get a blessing. I was not at confession recently so I was not in the proper disposition to recieve. So I went up with the entent of having Father bless both of us. When I approaced, I had my arms crossed and asked Father for a blessing. no sooner did I finish my sentence, he shoved a host in my mouth. I felt very awkward and bad at the same time. I obviously did not want to spit it back out but what was I to do? I went back and said an act of contrition. I have not yet been to confession but will defenitely be there this week. How do I explain this to the priest in the confessional?

Explain it the same way it happened… say that you were intending to receive a blessing, but the priest gave you Communion and you didn’t know what to do. You did not intend to receive unworthily… however it would still be an unworthy Communion and would need to be Confessed, - though you didn’t do this intentionally at all.

I think it might be best to stay in the pew during Communion, next time, and receive a blessing at the end of Mass, when the priest blesses all the people… the final blessing is no less effective. I read here on forums that it’s not the Church teaching to give individual blessings during Communion, though many aren’t aware of this.

God bless!

 

[liturgyluver]

This is the official letter with protocol number sent from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (CDWDS), a Roman dicastery that has the authority of the Holy Father.

Is this the document to which you are referring? I see no recognitio from the CDWDS. Therefore, it is not binding. This is similar to the document of the USCCB, Sing to the Lord.

Actually, it is an official letter with a protocol number. It is binding.

I laughed out loud when I read your post and the links. You expect to take seriously a copy of an undated “letter” sent to blank recipients (and only available on this forum!) as authority that an action is binding on the church, whilst dismissing an official document issued by the Bishops of England and Wales. What nonsense.

Even putting aside my doubts about the letter, if you take it at face value, nowhere does it say that giving a blessing is forbidden. Discouraged certainly but not forbidden.

 

[Elvis_Guy]

I laughed out loud when I read your post and the links. You expect to take seriously a copy of an undated “letter” sent to blank recipients (and only available on this forum!) as authority that an action is binding on the church, whilst dismissing an official document issued by the Bishops of England and Wales. What nonsense.

Even putting aside my doubts about the letter, if you take it at face value, nowhere does it say that giving a blessing is forbidden. Discouraged certainly but not forbidden.

Chuckle! Nice…

 

[thistle]

If this is the definitive reference, then nowhere does it say it is forbidden or not permitted. The words “explicitly discouraged” in section 3 and “should not” in section 5 can be interpreted as discretionary. I do wish the Vatican would be explict in its pronouncements: if it’s forbidden then just say so and then everyone will know.

Its only not clear to those who don’t want to follow the instructions.
Its perfectly clear to me.

On a separate issue nobody who has gone up for a blessing has ever explained why they feel the need for an extra blessing in addition to the blessing given by the priest at the end of the Mass. Do they think the one at the end is not good enough?

 

[CompSciGuy]

The Communion line is for those receiving Communion only.
It is not permitted to go up for a blessing and nor is it necessary as the priest gives everyone a blessing at the end of the Mass.

This is true. There are some parishes (mine included) where this is practiced. I think it is a bad idea, as it creates confusion sometimes (especially when you have a visiting priest) and can cause problems as the person distributing the host has to suddenly change gears.

 

[JGMendes4049]

I laughed out loud when I read your post and the links. You expect to take seriously a copy of an undated “letter” sent to blank recipients (and only available on this forum!) as authority that an action is binding on the church, whilst dismissing an official document issued by the Bishops of England and Wales. What nonsense.

Even putting aside my doubts about the letter, if you take it at face value, nowhere does it say that giving a blessing is forbidden. Discouraged certainly but not forbidden.

It is actually in the monthly journal of the CDWDS, the Notitiæ, so it’s not a “private” letter. There are previous threads on this forum that will show you how this is binding.

The “official” document from the episcopal conference of England and Wales is not binding, because it doesn’t have a recognitio from the CDWDS. Without approval from Rome, no document from an episcopal conference has any weight in the law.

 

[PodunkMommy]

This is not a sin. It was not an act of your will. An act of contrition is appropriate though, if you feel bad.

What would you rather have done? Taken Jesus out of your mouth? Of course not. You did nothing wrong. You can either say an act of contrition alone or go to confession if it puts your mind at ease.

I’m confused about the blessings as well. I’ve been told from the pulpit to come up for a blessing if unable to receive Communion (due to being in a state of sin) because we should at least get a blessing. If I couldn’t make it to confession I would usually stay in my seat during Communion but then when the priest said to go up for the blessings, I started to go up for a blessing since my daughter was to young to receive and our parish taught the children to go up for blessings as well.

We were told the same thing, fold your arms if you are coming up for a blessing.

I’m kind of stunned that I’ve never read anything about this before since it’s not permitted.

Blessings.

 

[Jesus_123]

… On a separate issue nobody who has gone up for a blessing has ever explained why they feel the need for an extra blessing in addition to the blessing given by the priest at the end of the Mass. Do they think the one at the end is not good enough?

+Hi Thistle . . .

The reality that prompts the possible need for receiving such a blessing continually reveals itself to be manifested as a very, very sensitive issue in RCIA classes . . .* which faces every one of us as teachers in such classes *. . . being singled out and “left behind” in a pew to be “in the way” and stumbled over . . . for all so left is a considerably humbling experience . . . which humility in-itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing . . . but for some tenderhearted or shy or struggling souls . . . week after week to be so relegated and set apart . . . it can be an experience rather like having a searing hot unwelcome spotlight singling them out to be judged as

“unworthy/unwantedand/or/unwelcome/not-one-of-us”

. . . no matter how dear their Lord is to them and how precious and important becoming a member in good standing of Christ’s church may be for them . . . while the church members line up to appear and be personally** received** and** welcomed** by their shepherd/priest as a child of God and a communicant . . .

Being able to go forward for a . . . personal . . . individual . . . and welcomed . . . contact and blessing from the priest . . . whether it is a child or an adult . . . can be a time when the tenderness of the Sacred Heart of . . . Jesus . . . ***the Blessed Christ of God ***. . . ***our Redeemer ***. . . is wonderfully open to recognizing each as one of God’s much beloved souls for whom He died on the Holy Cross to save . . . and quite frankly . . . if you watch carefully when the little children . . . *in particular *. . . walk radiantly back down the side aisles with their little arms crossed over their hearts . . . sweetly personally noticed, welcomed and blessed by their priest . . . you wouldn’t be prone to ever again doubt the sweetness and efficacy of such a blessing . . . our Lord knows His sheep by their very own names . . . the personal touch is and has a value as ** His touch upon each of the lives coming to Him in His priest . . . and is first and foremost just that . . . *very personal * . . . and for some in large churches it may be the only contact most of the time they may have with a priest . . .

Perhaps this is . . . why the Vatican . . . over these centuries upon centures upon centuries of time . . . has been so very careful not to completely restrict this form of blessing . . . and has not allowed it to be eliminated and strictly forbidden . . . though the children and the adults seeking the blessing may not be in full communion with the church as legally valid communicants . . . it tenderly and sympathetically leaves some leeway for a gentle sweet touch of Holy Love from our and their Wonderful Lord upon their individual lives when they humbly so approach the priest for said blessing . . .

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Blessed Lord+
. . . for so abundantly loving all God’s sheep and His lambs+
​

 

[Elvis_Guy]

+Hi Thistle . . .

The reality that prompts the possible need for receiving such a blessing continually reveals itself to be manifested as a very, very sensitive issue in RCIA classes . . .* which faces every one of us as teachers in such classes . . . being singled out and “left behind” in a pew to be “in the way” and stumbled over . . . for all so left is a considerably humbling experience . . . which humility in-itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing . . . but for some tenderhearted or shy or struggling souls . . . week after week to be so relegated and set apart . . . it can be an experience rather like having a searing hot unwelcome spotlight singling them out to be judged as
“unworthy/unwantedand/or/unwelcome/not-one-of-us”
. . . no matter how dear their Lord is to them and how precious and important becoming a member in good standing of Christ’s church may be for them . . . while the church members line up to appear and be personally* received** and** welcomed** by their shepherd/priest as a child of God and a communicant . . .

Being able to go forward for a . . . personal . . . individual . . . and welcomed . . . contact and blessing from the priest . . . whether it is a child or an adult . . . can be a time when the tenderness of the Sacred Heart of . . . Jesus . . . ***the Blessed Christ of God ***. . . ***our Redeemer ***. . . is wonderfully open to recognizing each as one of God’s much beloved souls for whom He died on the Holy Cross to save . . . and quite frankly . . . if you watch carefully when the little children . . . *in particular *. . . walk radiantly back down the side aisles with their little arms crossed over their hearts . . . sweetly personally noticed, welcomed and blessed by their priest . . . you wouldn’t be prone to ever again doubt the sweetness and efficacy of such a blessing . . . our Lord knows His sheep by their very own names . . . the personal touch is and has a value as ** His touch upon each of the lives coming to Him in His priest . . . and is first and foremost just that . . . *very personal * . . . and for some in large churches it may be the only contact most of the time they may have with a priest . . .

Perhaps this is . . . why the Vatican . . . over these centuries upon centures upon centuries of time . . . has been so very careful not to completely restrict this form of blessing . . . and has not allowed it to be eliminated and strictly forbidden . . . though the children and the adults seeking the blessing may not be in full communion with the church as legally valid communicants . . . it tenderly and sympathetically leaves some leeway for a gentle sweet touch of Holy Love from our and their Wonderful Lord upon their individual lives when they humbly so approach the priest for said blessing . . .

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Blessed Lord+
. . . for so abundantly loving all God’s sheep and His lambs+
​

Well put!!! This is why my wife (in RCIA ) is being included via individual blessing , and why in actuality , it is left to the discretion of the Diocese and Respective Bishop and Priests. The Church in practice has not taken a “hard line” on this…nor has made some effort to end it…as if were a horrid thing…which it is not… Thanks for that… Blessings!!!

 

[Jesus_123]

+May God sweetly and richly bless your dear wife’s journey home to the heart of our Holy Mother Catholic Church Elvis Guy . . .

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Blessed Lord+
. . . praise His Holy Name+​

 

[TrueLight]

Before I was received into the Church, I sure grumbled and complained about not being able to receive.

But never did I want to go up for a blessing. If I wanted a blessing, then I would have asked a priest separately.

What is the point of going on the communion line if you’re not receiving communion? It makes no sense.

But I understand why there is confusion.

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. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).

Can someone point me to where the Church’s discipline “has already made clear”? Thanks.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Because some are simply unaware it is not permitted and have picked it up from seeing others do it. Some defy the Church’s teaching on the matter. It matters not how many places have it written in a newsletter or on a “liturgy card” or printed in the bulletin or announced from the pulpit. It is not a matter of preference or local decision. It is not a US versus UK difference.

The Congregation of Divine Worship has issued a clarifying statement that it is not to be done.

We have 2 large screens behind each side of the altar - the blessing statement is put up before every communion…



I should send this to the priest anonymously.