Understanding priestly blessings

[TK421]

I’m told that when we make the sign of the cross we are blessing ourselves, but that at the same time only people with sacrament of Holy Orders can bless people (such as at the communion line). Is the word “blessing” here being used in two different manners? Is it appropriate for a lay person to give a blessing? If an extraordinary minister blesses someone, are they being sacrilegious? What effect (or purpose?) does a priestly blessing have that is unique from a lay blessing? When did the idea of “blessings” first come about? Does it have its roots in the Judaic priesthood?

I got my Miraculous Medal and an Our Lady of Fatima statue blessed today, though I don’t actually know what I’m doing in effect, at least not to my satisfaction. I know “blessings” should not be looked at as making things “magical” or “enchanted”, but that they are spiritual… but if they are spiritual, what is the purpose of getting a blessing from a priest versus myself, or another laity? If it’s a spiritual exercise, then it’s merit would rest on the charity of the action. My understanding was that Holy Orders are unique in their role in delivering visible signs of inward graces (so that we are not left wondering, God provides us tangible channels for his graces through flesh & blood human beings). How do “blessings” tie in with the priestly role of administering the sacraments?

 

[Gorgias]

I’m told that when we make the sign of the cross we are blessing ourselves, but that at the same time only people with sacrament of Holy Orders can bless people (such as at the communion line). Is the word “blessing” here being used in two different manners? Is it appropriate for a lay person to give a blessing? If an extraordinary minister blesses someone, are they being sacrilegious? What effect (or purpose?) does a priestly blessing have that is unique from a lay blessing?

There are a couple of things in play here.

First, there’s the question of ‘blessings’ in general. I’ve heard it said that there’s a difference between a blessing of someone who has the authority to bless another (e.g., a parent to a child, or a priest to a layperson) and the blessing of one who doesn’t possess such authority (e.g., a layperson to another layperson). The former, as it were, is an authoritative calling down of God’s blessing, and the latter is simply the wish that God’s blessing come down on a person.

Second, there’s the question of context and appropriateness. During communion, what is appropriate is the distribution of communion; what is not normative is any other activity. However, there are priests who see it as pastorally sensitive to offer blessings to some people (even if what is normative is only the distribution of communion to the faithful). Nevertheless, it goes beyond a question of the ‘norms’ to have a blessing of a layperson to another layperson. That would seem to imply an authority that is not present – either in context or in general.

So, it would seem that an EMHC should not be in the practice of giving blessings at the communion line: at the very least, that is not the ministry that he has been deputed to perform. Whether or not a priest celebrant (or deacon) should do so, is a separate question.

My understanding is that Holy Orders are only unique in the their role in delivering visible signs of inward graces

Umm… really?

No – the role of a priest is not limited to being a minister of the sacraments. That is one of the roles he fulfills… but it’s not the only one. The way you describe it, a priest is only some sort of Pez dispenser for the sacraments. That’s not what the Church teaches…

insofar as spiritual exercises, a priest has no fundamental “edge” over any other human being or even necessarily over a non-Christian.

A priest acts “in the person of Christ the head of the Church”. It would be odd, therefore, to say that he “has no fundamental ‘edge’ over any other human being”…

 

[ProVobis]

When did the idea of “blessings” first come about?

Probably in the translation. In the Latin, benedicere (like in benediction) means “to speak well of” but the word “bless” was used in the English. We can bless God, He can bless us, etc. etc. It may make more sense if you think about it from the standpoint of “speaking well of.” It is in opposition to “maledicere” or to speak evil of or to curse.

That said, “blessing” in the context of priest’s blessing in the name of God, is a rather unique function. It isn’t (can’t be?) done by other than a priest.

 

[TK421]

A priest acts “in the person of Christ the head of the Church”. It would be odd, therefore, to say that he “has no fundamental ‘edge’ over any other human being”…

When explaining vocations in Theology of the Body, this seems to be what JPII was teaching (unless I misunderstood). That is to say, for example: an archbishop that bickers about his parishioners is inferior to a laymen that does not. The merit of a spiritual exercise is dependent upon the charity in which it is given.

The sacraments are unique because whether they are given by a “bad” priest or a good priest, they are still just as much a sacrament. The holiness or lack thereof of a soul does not and cannot add to nor take away from the power of Christ.

And yes, that seems like a vulgar way of describing a noble office, but a priest is a ‘pez dispenser’ in so far as administering the sacraments are considered. That is what makes him strictly unique from somebody that doesn’t have Holy Orders, although obviously he is always going to be (or presumably would be) heavily involved with his flock as a pastor; something which is not dependent on his ability to administer the sacraments.

 

[TK421]

Probably in the translation. In the Latin, benedicere (like in benediction) means “to speak well of” but the word “bless” was used in the English. We can bless God, He can bless us, etc. etc. It may make more sense if you think about it from the standpoint of “speaking well of.” It is in opposition to “maledicere” or to speak evil of or to curse.

That said, “blessing” in the context of priest’s blessing in the name of God, is a rather unique function. It isn’t (can’t be?) done by other than a priest.

Is there an “official” condemnation of extraordinary lay minister giving blessings in the communion line, or is this something rejected by many people for prudential reasons? I’ve seen it done once at a parish I occasionally attend and I’m curious about it.

It’s an awkward situation since in many parishes it has become a norm to be able to receive a blessing if not receiving communion. If you’re not in a line with a priest or deacon though, you’re not receiving a priestly blessing (whatever that happens to be). Eucharistic Ministers are also put into a situation where they can bless them or turn them away, but turning them away would be misinterpreted, since they don’t have time to give a theological explanation in 0.5 seconds.

 

[TK421]

@Gorgias:

To further elaborate: administering the sacraments isn’t the only role of the priest, but it is the only role that is absolutely indispensable. The Catholic Church on Earth would cease to exist if there were no priests (which won’t/can’t happen), since there would be nobody to continue apostolic succession or nobody to perform the Mass. It would be awful if priests stopped corporal works of mercy or providing pastoral aid, but it wouldn’t kill the Church and it’s not something that is absolutely necessary for the priest to do.

 

[AttendeDomine]

A good thread on this topic: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=477608

 

[pianistclare]

Is there an “official” condemnation of extraordinary lay minister giving blessings in the communion line, or is this something rejected by many people for prudential reasons? I’ve seen it done once at a parish I occasionally attend and I’m curious about it.

It’s an awkward situation since in many parishes it has become a norm to be able to receive a blessing if not receiving communion. If you’re not in a line with a priest or deacon though, you’re not receiving a priestly blessing (whatever that happens to be). Eucharistic Ministers are also put into a situation where they can bless them or turn them away, but turning them away would be misinterpreted, since they don’t have time to give a theological explanation in 0.5 seconds.

No, when one is trained to be an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion they are instructed NOT to attempt to give a blessing, because they can’t.
A person not receiving should get in the priest’s line if they desire a blessing, but really, during Communion is not the time to seek a blessing. The priest blesses EVERYONE present at the conclusion of Mass. There is nothing “special” or “extra” when you go up for a blessing in the communion line. Many parishes encourage this (presumably for unity) but it’s really not a good practice. Our EMHC’s simply stand there and bow their heads in prayer, and the person does the same and walks away. It’s awkward for everyone.

 

[ProVobis]

If you’re not in a line with a priest or deacon though, you’re not receiving a priestly blessing (whatever that happens to be).

Right. And that is in the form of a sign of the cross, although I’ve seen where priests apply the hand to the forehead in cases of infants, for example. However, there is debate as to whether even this particular blessing should be extended to the grownups, but it isn’t surprising given that there is so much pressure to get up and stand in the communion line and one isn’t properly disposed. Either way, though, a EMHC isn’t qualified to bless, not in the form of a cross anyway.