First, you’ll get no argument from me that information doesn’t flow too well within the Catholic Church in any direction. I believe the “Blessing in lieu of Receiving the Holy Eucharist” was a holdover from the days when people didn’t receive the Holy Eucharist that often and younger children didn’t receive our Lord at all. Priests at the local Maronite Catholic Proto-Cathedral bless children with “The Mysteries” when they’re brought up by their parents, and this is part of the Maronite Catholic Tradition…
quote=benedictgal;6169429]However, Michael, a lot of the parishes do not know that this “blessing in lieu of receiving Holy Communion” should not be happening. Furthermore, as I indicated in my previous posts, information does not necessarily flow too smoothly from the top down. The CDWDS issues statements, but, very few people will read them, except for those who keep up with what is happening or do online research.
The bottom line is that these blessings should not be happening in the first place. I am certain that Venerable John Cardinal Newman did not engage in practices that were contrary to the liturgical norms of the Church, nor would he have wanted to do so.
What we are discussing here is the problem of folks coming forward and receiving a blessing in lieu of Holy Communion, something that the CDWDS clearly says should be “explicitly discouraged.”
…In this case, since RCIA wasn’t even going to begin until March, I was suggesting that our OP present himself to the priest as someone wishing to convert to the Catholic Faith and ask the priest if he could “get an early start”, and then ask for a blessing then…
I think you’ve made the Ruling on this matter quite obvious, and that the Vatican has allowed exceptions in order to keep people’s hearts (See
Baltobetsy #20). My suspicion is that Digital Anarchy will wait until he CAN receive the Holy Eucharist before he goes forward to receive - That he won’t try the “Blessing Route”, because he understands how that will “cheapen” his acceptance into the Church and his reception of our Lord.
I hope that, with this, we can put this thread to bed.
Your Broter in Christ, Michael
However, with all due respect, the question posed in this thread is what what should one do during Commuion? Furthermore, we do not mix and match rites here. There is no indication in the Latin Rite, the Rite we are addressing here, that these blessings were a “holdover”.
Texas Roofer still refuses to acknowledge that the letter from the CDWDS, which is the prevailing authority over the bishops, states that these blessings in lieu of Holy Communion should not happen.
According to the GIRM, the local Ordinary does not have the competency to add something to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. These are the only duties within his competency:
- The Diocesan Bishop, who is to be regarded as the high priest of his flock, and from whom the life in Christ of the faithful under his care in a certain sense derives and upon whom it depends,148 must promote, regulate, and be vigilant over the liturgical life in his diocese. It is to him that in this Instruction is entrusted the regulating of the discipline of concelebration (cf. above, nos. 202, 374) and the establishing of norms regarding the function of serving the priest at the altar (cf. above, no. 107), the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds (cf. above, no. 283), and the construction and ordering of churches (cf. above, no. 291). With him lies responsibility above all for fostering the spirit of the Sacred Liturgy in the priests, deacons, and faithful.
This is all that he can do. He cannot add anything to the Mass, as in this case, a blessing in lieu of receiving Holy Communion. If the bishop were to want to add this, he would have to bring it up to the entire USCCB (in our case). A vote would have to be taken in order to make this adaptation to the GIRM. Furthermore, an affirmative vote of 2/3 of the majority of the Latin-Rite bishops would have to be made. But, it does end there. Once the necessary votes have been received, having reached the required threshhold, the proposal must still be submitted to the CDWDS. The CDWDS can either grant the recognitio or deny it.
Using the video of the Holy Father does not necessarily justify anything. The Holy Father is the Supreme lawmaker. He is the Holy See. It is within his purview and his alone to amend liturgical law when he celebrates Mass. No one else enjoys this privilege.
Thus, what Texas Roofer states in his previous posts is incorrect. The CDWDS already gives five solid reasons as to why these blessings should not be happening. As Catholics, we need to read them and heed them, and not cause further confusion by encouraging this sort of thing to continue.
