M
Matariel
Guest
I thought deacons can only bless things with the Holy Eucharist at Benediction? I thought all other non-Eucharistic blessings were reserved for the holy priesthood.
- Status
F
FrDavid96
Guest
“A deacon can impart only those blessings which are expressly permitted to him by law” (c. 1169). Water is one of those blessings, especially since he can do so in the context of baptism when he is the celebrant. There are other blessings permitted to deacons as well.
M
Matariel
Guest
Oh, I did not know…
F
FrDavid96
Guest
That’s probably because you just don’t see it happen all that often.
I’m not sure exactly what/whom a deacon can/cannot bless. But here’s a few obvious examples just for the sake of illustration:
He can bless the congregation (in the absence of a priest) when he presides at the Liturgy of the Hours. He can give the blessing at the end of a Sunday celebration in the absence of a priest.
He can do blessings like throats on St. Blaise day, or animals on St. Francis day.
Some dioceses have written policies on the specific blessings deacons may impart, others simple follow what the liturgical books say and if they say that the deacon MAY give that blessing, the bishop allows that.
D
Deacon_Ed
Guest
In addition to what Fr. David has written, part of why you may not see a deacon do blessings is that we will always defer to a priest if he is present. I’ve blessed cars, homes, water, rosaries, medals, bibles and all sorts of things. There are actually very few blessings that are reserved to a priest or bishop. All the rest a deacon can do.
Deacon Ed
Deacon Ed
A
Aramis
Guest
As a head’s up: Byzantine Catholic Deacons do not have faculties to bless.
Rev. Fr: The word you were looking for is “coarseness”, a homonym.
Course: the route something travels
Coarse: not fine.
Rev. Fr: The word you were looking for is “coarseness”, a homonym.
Course: the route something travels
Coarse: not fine.
M
Matariel
Guest
Then, may I ask, is a bishop’s blessing more “powerful” than a priest’s? Or a priest’s more than a deacon’s? Also, does the spiritual disposition effect the amount of blessing bestowed (I assume not, if, when they bless, they are acting In Persona Christi.)
J
Jean_Anthony
Guest
abc
D
Digitonomy
Guest
This makes me curious about the nature of this faculty. Does the Sacrament of Holy Orders impart the ability to bless, which then may only be exercised validly consistent with faculties? Or are most of these blessings theoretically possible for laity to perform, in an extraordinary situation where a bishop decides this is necessary and grants faculties?
Since we both apparently love nitpicking, I’ll point out that the two words are more properly homophones - words that sound alike. Homographs are words that are written the same, such as wind a clock and the winter wind. Homonyms in the strictest sense have both the same spelling and pronunciation, yet are completely different words. She left open the window on the left.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Yes. That’s exactly how it works. You got it.
In order to impart a blessing, one must be in Holy Orders. Laity can never impart blessings. Laity may offer *prayers for *people, but never bless in the proper sense of the word.
If a bishop seems to do this, what is realy happening is that he is allowing the lay person to say a prayer that uses the same words as a proper blessing, but without the sign of the cross over the person (or thing) while simultaneously invoking the Trinity.
For an illustration, look to the Liturgy of the Hours. If a priest or deacon presides, the ends the liturgy with the blessing “May almighty God bless you, the Father…” Amen. (with the sign of the cross over the congregation, although that’s not mentioned in the rubrics for some reason in my book).
If a layperson presides, this is never done.
Instead what we see is “May the Lord bless us, protect us, etc…”
The sign of the cross would be made over oneself, and never over others who are present.
That’s the difference between imparting a proper blessing on the one hand, and saying a prayer of blessing on the other hand.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
"Digitonomy:
FrDavid96:
This then raises another question, related to Matariel’s question… Are any additional powers to bless obtained when one is ordained a priest or bishop, or is it simply a change in his canonical status that qualifies him for the greater faculties?
Since a layman can say “God bless you” when someone sneezes, and in general say “May the Lord bless you and keep you,” it doesn’t sound like there’s any meaningful distinction in the formulation of the words. Would it be fair to say that the only differences are that 1) laity should not properly extend their hands to make the sign of the cross in a priestly manner, and 2) the words of laity have no sacramental effect?
C
Cristiano
Guest
In our diocese Deacons are not allowed to used blessed oils to make sure that people will not consider such a blessing as the administration of the anointing of the sick.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
It realy depends upon the blessing. New churches and altars should proprely be blessed by bishops, by virtue of the fact that the bishop is a successor of the Apostles, and the shepherd of his diocese. These blessings are properly done by the bishop to express the communion between the local parish community and the pastoral office of the bishop. So it’s both spiritual and governance.
Blessing new chalices used to be reserved to the bishop IN PART because this gave the bishop the opportunity to “inspect” it to ensure that it was properly made and designed and dignified for use at the Holy Sacrifice (note what happened when the Church stopped requiring bishops to bless new chalices and you’ll understand the wisdom of this!)
Blessing of something personal, like rosaries for example may be done by a parish priest as the representative of the bishop, but there’s no spiritual or ecclesial necessity of having the bishop present, so the priest may do it.
The answer to your question is actually “both, and”
That’s what I’ve been expressing in similar posts. Just because we hear the word “bless” doesn’t mean that what is happening is a blessing. “God bless you” after a sneeze is not the same thing as “May Almighty God bless you…” at the end of Mass. Same verb, but vastly different meanings, even though they are related.
- The laity should never extend hands and make the sign of the cross over someone as this is simulating a priestly gesture.
- I am not saying that the words have “no effect” but that the prayer offered at that moment is not a blessing and the person or thing which is the object is not “blessed.” To say one is not necessarily to say the other. For example, if a priest blesses a statue, it is a holy object, to be respected and treated with dignity. We would never throw it in the trash can. We don’t pour holy water down the bathroom sink because it has been blessed.
That’s because even though we might use the word in a causal sense, the food has not been “blessed” in the proper sense of the word.
The problem arises because in recent years, too many lay people have been simulating the words and actions of priests, and even adopting the vocabulary of sacred actions which are properly reserved to those in Holy Orders. We can use the verb “bless” but only if we do so with the understanding that the blessing of a cleric and the prayer offered by a layperson are not the same thing. When we lose that distinction, we misunderstand just what a blessing is by trivializing the word.
C
cameron_lansing
Guest
The notion of blessing contains a variety of meanings not only in common usage (referenced above perhaps as “casual”) but also in Church usage.
In the canonical sense, a blessing is an act of divine worship by the Church (see c. 1166+), so that it is contained in and regulated by its approved ritual books. These would give details about particular blessings as governed by liturgical law (c. 2).
Such a blessing is a sacramental. It pertains to the sanctifying function of the Church. The decree which published the Book of Blessings notes that the celebration of blessings holds a privileged place among the sacamentals created by the Church for the pastoral benefit of the people of God. As a liturgical action, the celebration leads the faithful to praise God and prepares them for the principal effect of the sacraments. By celebrating a blessing the faithful can also sanctify various situations and events in their lives. (Congregation for Divine Worship, 31 May 1984).
However, such a blessing can be invocative or constitutive.
Invocative blessings call upon God to favor or protect a person.
Constitutive blessings set a person or thing aside for sacred purpose, imparting a sacred character to them, and, in the case of persons, sometimes changing their canonical status in the Church. These blessings vary in weight. A constitutive blessing *resembles *(but is not *quite *identical to) a consecration or a dedication.
While the laity can preside at certain of the blessings in the Book of Blessings, those particular blessings are invocative.
As the “preface” of the Book explains, “The ministry of blessing involves a particular exercise of the priesthood of Christ and, in keeping with the place and office within the people of God belonging to each person.” Thus it continues that the exercise of this ministry is determined by several normative principles that follow.
Blessings by sacred ministers has been touched up above, so only the principle speaking to the laity might be mentioned for clarification:
“. . . laymen and laywomen, in virtue of the universal priesthood, a dignity they possess because of their baptism and confirmation, may celebrate certain blessings, as indicated in the respective orders of blessings, by use of the rites and formularies designated for a lay minister. Such laypersons exercise this ministry in virtue of their office (for example, parents on behalf of their children) or by reason of some special liturgical ministry or in fulfillment of a particular charge in the Church, as is the case in many places with religious or catechists appointed by decision of the local Ordinary, after ascertaining their proper pastoral formation and prudence in the apostolate.”
In the canonical sense, a blessing is an act of divine worship by the Church (see c. 1166+), so that it is contained in and regulated by its approved ritual books. These would give details about particular blessings as governed by liturgical law (c. 2).
Such a blessing is a sacramental. It pertains to the sanctifying function of the Church. The decree which published the Book of Blessings notes that the celebration of blessings holds a privileged place among the sacamentals created by the Church for the pastoral benefit of the people of God. As a liturgical action, the celebration leads the faithful to praise God and prepares them for the principal effect of the sacraments. By celebrating a blessing the faithful can also sanctify various situations and events in their lives. (Congregation for Divine Worship, 31 May 1984).
However, such a blessing can be invocative or constitutive.
Invocative blessings call upon God to favor or protect a person.
Constitutive blessings set a person or thing aside for sacred purpose, imparting a sacred character to them, and, in the case of persons, sometimes changing their canonical status in the Church. These blessings vary in weight. A constitutive blessing *resembles *(but is not *quite *identical to) a consecration or a dedication.
While the laity can preside at certain of the blessings in the Book of Blessings, those particular blessings are invocative.
As the “preface” of the Book explains, “The ministry of blessing involves a particular exercise of the priesthood of Christ and, in keeping with the place and office within the people of God belonging to each person.” Thus it continues that the exercise of this ministry is determined by several normative principles that follow.
Blessings by sacred ministers has been touched up above, so only the principle speaking to the laity might be mentioned for clarification:
“. . . laymen and laywomen, in virtue of the universal priesthood, a dignity they possess because of their baptism and confirmation, may celebrate certain blessings, as indicated in the respective orders of blessings, by use of the rites and formularies designated for a lay minister. Such laypersons exercise this ministry in virtue of their office (for example, parents on behalf of their children) or by reason of some special liturgical ministry or in fulfillment of a particular charge in the Church, as is the case in many places with religious or catechists appointed by decision of the local Ordinary, after ascertaining their proper pastoral formation and prudence in the apostolate.”
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Thanks. “However, such a blessing can be invocative or constitutive.” is the vocabulary I’ve been searching for. Not something we use everyday.
The key words in the last paragraph (taken from the new Book of Blessings) is to say that laypersons may “celebrate certain blessings” in other words, they may use the words found in the book as a prayer, but may not actually impart a blessing (constitutive). The ritual itself changes if a layperson is saying this prayer (no sign of the cross, with the accompanying “In the Name of the Father…” )
The whole thing is rather confusing because we use the words “blessing” or “bless” to describe different realities.
In my persoal opinion, we should not even be using the word “blessing” to refer to these invocative prayers, because it causes no end of confustion, as evidenced by this very thread.
C
cameron_lansing
Guest
"The whole thing is rather confusing because we use the words “blessing” or “bless” to describe different realities. "
The case at hand is illustrative of a number of notions in common and Church usage that vary in meaning between the categories and even within those two categories themselves. Consider the woes arising from the apparently innocuous term “blessing a marriage” when what is meant is the remedy of a previous wedding celebration that was inefficacious to establishing marriage in the first place!
Usually, but not always, context is helpful in a any given source in which a term appears. Then too, most folks are relying on a translation from a source written in ecclesiastical Latin, and that complicates things.
The case at hand is illustrative of a number of notions in common and Church usage that vary in meaning between the categories and even within those two categories themselves. Consider the woes arising from the apparently innocuous term “blessing a marriage” when what is meant is the remedy of a previous wedding celebration that was inefficacious to establishing marriage in the first place!
Usually, but not always, context is helpful in a any given source in which a term appears. Then too, most folks are relying on a translation from a source written in ecclesiastical Latin, and that complicates things.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Yes, so let’s make it more concrete.
The over-use of the word “blessing” results in the following scenario:
A layperson says “I’m going to bless a font of plain water and “make” holy water because, by virtue of the universal priesthood a lay priest may bless water just as a ministerial priest may bless water. There is no difference. That’s what Vatican II teaches, and that’s what the Book of Blessings says.”
I have encountered such a situation more than once, so that’s not my imagination at work here. I have even been in situations, as a priest, when laypersons have asked me to “assist” them while they bless holy water, by holding the book or some such. Needless to say, that’s not what happened.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
Thanks for that explanation and reference from the Book of Blessings.
Is there an indication whether there are blessings, faculties for which cannot by their nature be granted to priests or deacons? In other words, even if a bishop extended faculties to these clergy, such a constitutive blessing would not be imparted by their actions.
M
mystified
Guest
Deacon Ed: As a dual rite deacon, are the faculties identical in both rites?
Secondly, long before Vatican II, parents were encouraged to bless their children by making a sign of th croos on their foreheads. Am I right in assuming that this has not changed.
Finally, maybe I’m oversensitive to what appears to be abuses, but there doesn’t seem to be anything in writing that says a Extraordinary Minister of the Holy Eucharist may stop while distributing Communion under either form to bless a person requesting it instead of Communion, particularly young children.
It happens every Mass ain our parish.
Secondly, long before Vatican II, parents were encouraged to bless their children by making a sign of th croos on their foreheads. Am I right in assuming that this has not changed.
Finally, maybe I’m oversensitive to what appears to be abuses, but there doesn’t seem to be anything in writing that says a Extraordinary Minister of the Holy Eucharist may stop while distributing Communion under either form to bless a person requesting it instead of Communion, particularly young children.
It happens every Mass ain our parish.
D
Dicerning
Guest
Kidding right? the Blessing doesn’t come from the person who is giving it.
A preist and bishop recieve their faculties to bless things when they are ordained deacons.
THe blessing comes from GOD not the person or “status” of a person giving the blessing.
My rosary is blessed by my deacon. The blessing is just as good as if it were blessed by the priest.
- Status