Questions about Communion...

[Jon_S_1]

Sarcasm is forbidden under the forum rules.

Let’s go through the issue again.

See the link to the letter of the Congregation for Divine Worship on the subject of Blessings at Communion.
Yes this is a letter and has no legal weight. However, within the letter it refers to** existing Church discipline** regarding non-Catholics and Catholics who are not in a state of grace"

" the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing"

ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur263.htm

Then we have the GIRM which sets out the instructions for everything that is allowed at Mass. By default if the GIRM does not mention it then it is not allowed. It does not say Catholics in a state of mortal sin, Catholics who are too young to receive, or non-Catholics may receive a blessing.

I’m not going to go through this with you…it is fruitless. I will side with my priests, bishop and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

My previous post was not sarcasm, only an extreme example of “things not listed in the GIRM that are not allowed”

 

[casslean]

Then we have the GIRM which sets out the instructions for everything that is allowed at Mass. By default if the GIRM does not mention it then it is not allowed. It does not say Catholics in a state of mortal sin, Catholics who are too young to receive, or non-Catholics may receive a blessing.

Just wanted to point out that this proposition has been pretty soundly refuted by the same author you’ve already quoted in an earlier letter on this same topic (all bolding mine):

One reader proposed that accepting the possibility of this blessing of non-communicants went against the principle that** “liturgical documents are prohibitive of all that they do not prescribe.”**

While in no means in favor of liturgical inventiveness,** I do not believe this to be a valid principle in interpreting liturgical law.**

Liturgical norms have several levels ranging from the Divine decree (such as the essential elements of the sacraments) to precepts descriptive of prevalent customs, the latter constituting the vast majority of liturgical norms.

The different levels do not lessen their value as true laws, which require obedience. But they are usually content to set out a general scheme with no desire to rigidly set every gesture to the exclusion of all others.

source: ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur81.htm

Obviously, as you’ve pointed out, this author does not favour the use of blessings during Communion. But he also is clear, even in the article you posted, that there is currently nothing in Church doctrine prohibiting their use.

 

[Vico]

Yet even the Pope Emeritus has recognized the advantages of giving blessings to those who don’t receive communion. He is revising his “complete works” of theology and has recently added this to a section on communion for the divorced and remarried (see here):
I would like to add another practical suggestion. In many countries it has become customary for persons who are not able to receive communion (for example, the members of other confessions) to approach the altar with their hands folded over their chests, making it clear that they are not receiving the sacrament but are asking for a blessing, which is given to them as a sign of the love of Christ and of the Church. This form could certainly be chosen also by persons who are living in a second marriage and therefore are not admitted to the Lord’s table. The fact that this would make possible an intense spiritual communion with the Lord, with his whole Body, with the Church, could be a spiritual experience that would strengthen and help them.

A strange practice indeed to indicate no reception by crossing! As a Byzantine Catholic, I receive the Holy Eucharist in the traditional way with my arms crossed on the chest, which is the cross of St. Andrew. Once I was at a Latin Mass and approached the priest to receive the Holy Eucharist and he questioned me, more than once, asking if I want to receive. This now explains that mysterious response of the priest:
“it has become customary for persons who are not able to receive communion (for example, the members of other confessions) to approach the altar with their hands folded over their chests, making it clear that they are not receiving the sacrament but are asking for a blessing”.

 

[thistle]

Just wanted to point out that this proposition has been pretty soundly refuted by the same author you’ve already quoted in an earlier letter on this same topic (all bolding mine):

source: ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur81.htm

Obviously, as you’ve pointed out, this author does not favour the use of blessings during Communion. But he also is clear, even in the article you posted, that there is currently nothing in Church doctrine prohibiting their use.

What about the reference in the letter:

" the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing".

That seems pretty clear and unambiguous.

 

[Sirach2]

What about the reference in the letter:

" the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing".

That seems pretty clear and unambiguous.

It would be more beneficial if you quoted the rest of the letter, which says:
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.

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”:
Therefore, it would be wise not to force one’s dogmatic opinion on others, but to speak the whole truth – which says that it is under study and no definitive decision has been formulated, even though the leaning is presently negative.

We ought not to lay burdens on the faithful of distrusting their local ordinary, who may be perfectly correct at this point in time to allow the practice.

 

[CalCatholic]

Yet even the Pope Emeritus has recognized the advantages of giving blessings to those who don’t receive communion. He is revising his “complete works” of theology and has recently added this to a section on communion for the divorced and remarried (see here):

I would like to add another practical suggestion. In many countries it has become customary for persons who are not able to receive communion (for example, the members of other confessions) to approach the altar with their hands folded over their chests, making it clear that they are not receiving the sacrament but are asking for a blessing, which is given to them as a sign of the love of Christ and of the Church. This form could certainly be chosen also by persons who are living in a second marriage and therefore are not admitted to the Lord’s table. The fact that this would make possible an intense spiritual communion with the Lord, with his whole Body, with the Church, could be a spiritual experience that would strengthen and help them.

 

[ProVobis]

Then we have the GIRM which sets out the instructions for everything that is allowed at Mass. By default if the GIRM does not mention it then it is not allowed. It does not say Catholics in a state of mortal sin, Catholics who are too young to receive, or non-Catholics may receive a blessing.

FWIW, I found it fruitless to argue about the force of IGMR, the universal GENERAL instructions of the Mass. For one thing, this is not Canon Law and for another, each bishops’ conference translates it into what they think is proper for their country or diocese. The U.S. GIRM, for example, is slightly different for U.K. GIRM. I imagine the Philippine GIRM is different still.

 

[Vico]

If all those that do not receive the Holy Eucharist stay for the Concludingn Rites then the blessing will be received, as USCCB states:
In every case, the blessing is always trinitarian: “May almighty God bless you, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” It is in the triune God and in the sign of the cross that we find our blessing.

usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/concluding-rites/

 

[Jon_S_1]

If all those that do not receive the Holy Eucharist stay for the Concludingn Rites then the blessing will be received, as USCCB states:
In every case, the blessing is always trinitarian: “May almighty God bless you, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” It is in the triune God and in the sign of the cross that we find our blessing.

usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/concluding-rites/

What you maybe don’t realize is the “blessing” at the communion line is an unofficial blessing. Even lay leaders give it. More appropriately it should be called words of encouragement or prayer for the person.

They say simply things like “May God guide and keep you” “may the love of Christ be with you” or something of that nature.

Don’t get hung up on the “blessing” part.

But even if it was a “duplicate blessing” there is no prohibition on the number of times one can be blessed.

Allowing people to go up and not receive is one of those things we can do that is simple and practical and makes the church more welcoming without jeopardizing our doctrines. As such I feel it should be encouraged. It helps a person make a spiritual communion when they can not take the Eucharist.