A reader writes:
My wife is Episcopalian. I am Catholic. Recently, she was attending Mass, sitting up in the choir loft with our 2 1/2 year old son, while I was the cantor. At communion, she normally stays up in the choir loft at the back of the church (my father sings in the choir, so she gets privileges to sit off to the side/back), but one of the choir members normally carries our son down to Communion- mainly just to give him a ride.
So, this most recent time our son went with his usual ride, and I think another choir member, or possibly the choir director (who is pretty Orthodox)- not sure which it was, said she should go down to get a blessing. As you probably know, at Episcopal/Lutheran/probably other churches you can cross your arms on your chest to receive a blessing if you don’t want to receive communion.
So, she went down, and did that, and the pastor basically looked at her and said "We don’t do that". She handled it gracefully, but my questions are as follows:
1) I thought blessings could be given in such a case. Is this wrong? I thought I’d read at one point had indicated this was possible.
The giving of blessings during Communion time is a sticky subject. There are several principles to keep in mind:
- Since giving a blessing is not the same thing as giving Communion, this represents an interruption of the distribution of Communion.
- It is not provided for in the liturgical books, and canon and liturgical law prohibit introducing new elements into the liturgy.
- That being said, a priest is empowered to interrupt the liturgy for an adequate cause. For example, if a plane flies over during a prayer or his homily, he can pause for a moment until the plane is past.
- It strikes me as reasonable–and it’s certainly within the realm of legitimate liturgical opinion to hold that it is reasonable–for a priest to pause the distribution of Communion in order to administer a blessing if the alternative is sending someone away disappointed and possibly angry and disaffected.
- That being said, I would not be encouraging people to go up for such a blessing since it is not provided for in the liturgical books–yet. (See below on this.)
- What I have said applies to priests and deacons. It does not necessarily apply to laity who are giving Communion and who are empowered to give blessings in many fewer circumstances than members of the clergy.
Having said that, I suspect that the giving of blessings during Communion time is may receive authorization at some point.
At the recent Synod of Bishops meeting on the Eucharist, the bishops talked about this practice as a way of giving people (including non-Catholics) a way to participate so that they don’t feel pressure to receive Communion if they aren’t able to receive it. We know that because the topic showd up in the Instrumentum laboris for the Synod, which stated:
Some responses [by bishops to a questionnaire sent out to prepare the groundwork for the Synod] mention that priests, while distributing Holy Communion, give a blessing to children or catechumens—both duly pointed out—who approach the altar and have not made their First Communion. In some Churches, a blessing is imparted to non-Catholics who approach the altar at Communion time. In this regard, some responses from Asia suggest finding some gesture at Communion time towards non-Christians to make them feel more a part of the liturgical community.
It is possible that Pope Benedict will take up the subject in his Post-Synodal Exhortation, which should be released within a year or so. If he does take it up (and I’m not saying that he will) then my guess is that he will approve the practice for precisely the reasons that the bishops’ responses spoke positively of it–that it will relieve social pressure to receive Communion for those who are not able to receive, thus resulting in fewer sacrilegious receptions of Communion (something that the synod fathers were very concerned about).
It is also possible, giving how widespread this practice is, that the Congregation for Divine Worship may weigh in on it. If that happens, it could either approve or disapprove of it.
All this is just speculation, though. The issue at hand is what does liturgical law provide now (covered in the bullet points above).
Since this practice does not have current authorization, I’d try to be understanding of your priest. He’s trying to do what he think is right, even if his application on the law of this point may have not taken account of the idea that it is reasonable to pause the distribution of Communion for a just cause.
2) He also does not bless the smaller children, which I have seen done other places. What is the common (or alternatively, the advisable) practice regarding that?
The same considerations apply. If you have a child being brought up for a blessing and one is denied then either the parents or the parents and the child may go away disappointed, angry, and disaffected, which strike me as legitimate reasons to pause to give a blessing.
3) If a blessing is allowed and/or proper/encouraged, what would you recommend as supporting evidence to the pastor?
Since this practice is not provided for in liturgical law, there isn’t really any documentation on it, but feel free to show him this blog post as a liturgical law opinion.
Of course, a blessing by an extraordinary minister is an entirely different question.
Jimmy,
As a priest, I have had to deal with this question. As you say (and as Fr McNamara of Zenit also says) it is not part of the liturgy and we are not to add or modify rites and rituals of our own accord.
The difficulty I have, taking the above into consideration, is twofold: first, there is a difference between pausing Mass for a plane to go by and pausing Mass to perform a religious action. In the latter case, how is that any different than integrating an extraliturgical modification into Mass? How would one be able to tell the difference between changes and pauses? Is it merely a matter of intent? In that case, why can’t I halt Mass to bless someone’s Rosary, or halt Mass to have a ballet troupe present interpretive religious dance? (It wouldn’t be liturgical dance if we’ve paused the liturgy.) How would this not lead to anarchy if the only criterion is that somebody has to be disaffected for me to justify pausing Mass to insert the action of my choice? That seems a lot different than waiting for a plane to pass overhead before resuming. Silence is inaction, not additional action.
Second, this would seem to be an attempt to “sneak in the back door.” If one person does this, other people will do it, and it will soon become commonplace even though it is not allowed, resulting in multiple “Mass pausings” to distribute blessings. When these parishioners visit other parishes, then their priests will have to deal with the issue. If the Vatican does not in fact legalize this, then there will be some angry laypeople for us to deal with, especially if the Holy See explicitly forbids the practice. It is rarely a good idea to anticipate Vatican actions that have not yet come to be. Speculation remains just that: speculation.
And do we really want to equate the grace of the great Sacrament of Communion with a simple blessing? Wouldn’t it be a better witness to the sanctity of the Sacrament to have to make sacrifices to receive it? I believe (off the top of my head) that then-Cardinal Ratzinger at one point advocated that even those able to receive might want to take an occasional break from the reception of Holy Communion in solidarity with those who cannot receive, and to make sure that we do not begin to take reception for granted.
Thanks for listening to “the other side,” and thanks for all the great work you do for the Church!
God bless!
Our priest announced at Mass (I think he actually read a letter from the Bishop) that those not receiving communion should remain seated, and explained that everyone gets a blessing at every Mass, and so people don’t need to bother the priest to get a special blessing of “their own”.
Well, he didn’t mention “bothering the priest”, I threw that in.
We have a lot of people receiving the Eucharist, and if everyone else came forward for a blessing, distributing communion would take even longer.
As an RCIA teacher I often have to tell catechumens that there are some liturgical things that we cannot/do not/may not/must not do. And so….
We should not hold hands during the our father. We should not kneel where the Roman missal say we should stand. We should not go up for a blessing during communion. I think that the procesion is precicesly for communicants in act and not just in spirit.
That being said, however for those who feel a burning need and desire to show thier intent to ultimately join the church and make it known in this particular way, I tell them that they should NOT recieve a blessing from the EMC’s as they have not the authority nor the power to bless in a liturgical situation. They should at least get in the priests procession and recieve a blessing directly from him as his hands have been specifically consecrated to bless.
If we are going to err in church at least we should err on the side of piety and not dissent.
As a priest, I have long wrestled with this situation.
I am considering the following as a possible solution (though I have not ever done it).
If someone approaches me as I am giving out Communion, and that person appears to want a blessing instead of Communion, I might lift the ciborium (the dish) to that person’s eye level and just say, “The Body of Christ, Amen.”
Nothing more than that.
My question- how prevalent do the commenters really think this would be? At my parish, fewer than 5 people per Mass (out of 500-700 perhaps) stay in the pews at Communion… so the number of blessings, and therefore interruptions, would seem to really be pretty small.
I have heard the phrase “pastoral provision” used that supposedly gives a pastor quite a bit of latitude in adapting some matters, Does anyone know how or if it would apply in this situation? To be honest I just follow what my pastor does–or what the pastor says to do in any parish I assist at Mass and don’t worry about it
There may be another discussion resulting from this issue: namely, the consequence it would have on catholics who should abstain from receiving the blessed sacrament.
I’m not proud of it, in fact, deeply ashamed. But In the past when I’ve been in the state of mortal sin and with family; rather than opt out of communion and signal to my family with a flashing ‘red’ light that I’ve completely cut myself off from God’s grace, I’ve conformed and gone up to recieve the blessed Eucharist–I know this is the gravest of sins.
Although, I’m not suggesting a change in liturgical policy would be the answer. Clearly, other things could be brought forward: Christian duty and reverence for the real presence requires one to respond in an appropriate and sometimes extremely humbled fashion. Plus, some would still notice that you recieved just a blessing, and still make comment.
Excellent as always, Jimmy. While I was still in RCIA, before I knew better I usually went forward for a blessing. Barring some change in the Church’s practice, I wouldn’t encourage anyone to do this now, but there’s got to be a more pastoral way for a priest to deal with those who do come forward than saying “We don’t do that.”
No kidding. To make matters worse, at our previous parish there was an extraordinary minister who went out of her way to try to give blessings to our children, who were of course not coming up for blessings but were simply in tow. Eventually I went to her outside of Mass and told her as nicely as I could to cut it out.
We have a priest at our present parish who blesses our children during communion. I don’t bring them up for it, but it doesn’t bother me.
Anonymous sinner makes a good point and it highlights the law of unintended consequences when a change is made in something. I can still remember the BAD, BAD old days when the communion fast began at midnight and went until you received communion. Back then the church was half-filled with non-communicants who had “accidentallY” eaten something when they got up OR went to Mass so late one had had to have eaten breakfast earlier. Noone had to worry they would be pegged as a mortal sinner–they were all presumed to be fast-breakers. Now with virtually no excuse–and rather than be red-faced and left mostly alone–the solution has come to be to simply skip Mass and make rationales and excuses for doing so::Boring, bad music, lousy sermons, etc..
Hmm… I’ve gone up and put my finger on my mouth (like the Sshh ‘be quiet’ sign, and received a blessing. I didn’t know that it was wrong. So if you’re in mortal sin and Catholic, the just stay in the pew?
When I was in RCIA (Jan-June 2003), I was told that I could go up to the priest (but only the priest) for a blessing. I don’t recall being told it was official Church doctrine, but nor was I told it was only for that specific church or diocese (at the time, I was attending the Basilica of St. Mary in Minneapois, MN).
I liked the practice. I always felt so conspicuous remaining in the pew, especially if I had to stand so people could get past me. I felt that even if I couldn’t receive the special gift of Christ’s blood in the Eucharist, at least I could receive an extra blessing to give me a little bit of extra grace to help me through the upcoming week.
What good discussion. Nothing off point, yet. That said, oh never mind, let’s stay on point.
The parish that I attend is relatively small (Approx 300 attend Mass on a weekend -I’m guaging this by how many bulletins I have to print out at Fr’s request) and the extended time involved by giving individual Blessing’s is minimal.
Perhaps larger parishes would necessitate the priest rethinking whether or not to give individual Blessings, but I’m so pleased that in our parish, Fr has no qualms about it at all and invites thos who are not Catholic to come forward to recieve a blessing.
My Mum is in the process of swimming the Tiber and I can not express how beautiful it is to see her go up for a blessing and come back to the pew with tears in her eyes.(She was never a church goer -this is some conversion experience and a wonder to watch unfold!) She kneels down afterward and makes an act of spiritual communion which I printed out for her. Her participation (or what she feels to be this fuller participation) has had a profound effect upon her walk with the Lord.
And yet this could have been very different.
If our parish priest had chosen not to give a blessing to individuals who come forward,I know that from talking to her about this, she would have felt that the Church was not ‘inclusive’.
God Bless
Anonymous sinner, don’t go up. Don’t go up. Do NOT go up. (Just keep repeating it.) Your soul is more important than what some Nosey Nelly (known in my family as Mom)thinks. If necessary, stuff a donut in your mouth on your way out the door (making sure to let the powdered sugar stick to your lip), thus ensuring you’ve got a valid excuse.
BTW, I have gotten the “look” from members of my parish when I was a Holy Day Catholic. But I’ve only ever had one person comment on it myself, and I just said, “You’re not the priest of me.” (Echoing that “You’re not the boss of me” from childhood, btw.)
It seems that the consensus is that folks shouldn’t receive blessings during the distribution of the Eucharist, but what about making a non-communative act of reverence, with no blessing? For instance, I’ve seen people who are not able to receive Holy Communion go up, cross their arms, and simply bow before the Blessed Sacrament, and then go back to their pew without expecting or getting a blessing. They don’t seem to be interrupting the liturgy in any way, so it sounds like that would be permissable. And it does some of the “inclusiveness” work of receiving a blessing without the drawbacks mentioned by several people. Any thoughts from people who know more than I do?
An interesting addition to this discussion is Pope John Paul II’s comments in no. 72 of his encyclical on ecumenism, Ut Unum Sint: “In this respect I would like to mention one demonstration dictated by fraternal charity and marked by deep clarity of faith which made a profound impression on me. I am speaking of the Eucharistic celebrations at which I presided in Finland and Sweden during my journey to the Scandinavian and Nordic countries. At Communion time, the Lutheran Bishops approached the celebrant. They wished, by means of an agreed gesture, to demonstrate their desire for that time when we, Catholics and Lutherans, will be able to share the same Eucharist, and they wished to receive the celebrant’s blessing. With love I blessed them. The same gesture, so rich in meaning, was repeated in Rome at the Mass at which I presided in Piazza Farnese, on the sixth centenary of the canonization of Saint Birgitta of Sweden, on 6 October 1991.”
Do you think the Holy Father thought it was okay only for Lutheran bishops to come up for a blessing during the communion procession?
Jimmy, I think you are off the mark on this. “Feeling left out” is a good thing if one is not in communion with the church, or in a state of mortal sin. It gives motivation to get back in the grace of God and be in communion with the church. I don’t see how changing communion to be more “inclusive” is somehow less evil than changing the scripture readings to more “inclusive” language. We are to reproach the sinner, it’s is on of those works of mercy, what can be more reproachful than someone having to stay on their knees being unable to recieve the Lord?
It is our Lord who is present up there, when we were children, we would not approach our own parents if we did something wrong, how arrogant of us who “should be as little children” in our faith that we dare approach our Lord when we cannot recieve him due to the state of our souls.
If you feel left out, or conspicuous being the pew during communion, get to confession and try not to sin.
The priest reaction and logic doesn’t seem right to me.
I”ve been at two churches recently (both Roman Catholic) and at both places the priest encouraged people who were not receiving communion to come up for a blessing. One of the parishes also had this information in the pew book.
I’m on Canada, so I’m not sure if this is due to different practices.
“It strikes me as reasonable — and it’s certainly within the realm of legitimate liturgical opinion to hold that it is reasonable — for a priest to pause the distribution of Communion in order to administer a blessing if the alternative is sending someone away disappointed and possibly angry and disaffected.” (Words of James Akin)
No. From the very fact that these blessings have never been provided for in the Church’s liturgical documents — never in the 35-year history of the Mass of Paul VI, not even in the new 2000 GIRM … From that very fact, we see that it is NOT “reasonable” and ought not to “strike” anyone as “reasonable.”
The end does not justify the means. A priest cannot do evil (e.g., disobey the liturgical law that forbids adding novelties) so that good may come of it (avoiding “disappoint[ment]” or “ang[er]” or “disaffect[ion]”).
Such blessings are an illicit accretion, picked up from some denomination of protestantism (if I recall correctly). They must not be done during the Mass unless/until they have been adopted as an adaptation by a supermajority of the votes of a bishops’ conference, followed by approval by the Holy See.
Case closed.
The Bishops of England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland, write this in their document “One Bread, One Body.”
43. Even though some 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 reaffirm. 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 emphasises that a deep spiritual communion is possible even when we do not share together the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ.
Whether that acknowledgment of the practice is seen as, is meant, to validate it, I would be unsure, but as a practice it is very prevalent, certainly in England.
“(Words of James Akin)” Who is *James* Akin?
Two points come to mind here:
The first relates to the role of illicit practices in the organic development of the liturgy. Whatever one’s views of the practice, it is clear that change does seem to come about in many instances where non-observance of a rule, or introduction of an innovation, becomes widespread. So the interesting question for me is, how much of what is provided for now in the GIRM is as a result of the adoption of earlier illicit actions.
The second is, I consider myself to be liturgically orthodox (and have had many a “quiet, friendly but firm” word with a priest after Mass). But there does seem to be some sign value (let alone psychological value) in having all who are able proceed forward at Communion time. A blessing then becomes a foreshadow of the True Communion: it accentuates that desire for Christ in the Blessed Sacrament in a way that sitting in the pews watching everyone go up (and having everyone watching you and wondering..) may not.
Gelsbern writes in high dudgeon “If you feel left out, or conspicuous being the pew during communion, get to confession and try not to sin.”
Perhaps you might entertain the possibility of a penitent who, being conscious of mortal sin very much wants to go to confession. Confession being offered at all of the churches in his area solely from about 3:30 to 3:50 pm on Saturday when said penitent works. Of course, said person can “make an appointment” and does so…but it takes 7 weeks for the priest to fit in said penitent. If the priest were willing to offer a blessing, would this penitent’s going forward, not receiving communion and being blessed by the priest not accord with discipline? In past ages, the penitents were dismissed along with the catechumens, with the congregation’s prayers for perseverance. Now it’s supposed to be better to pretend we were eating in the car on the way to church?
Or can you not imagine the scenario above. You should, because that’s what happened to me several years ago.
But why is it such a big deal to stay back in the pew? Geez, folks, there’s a hundred reasons not to go up. My personal favorite is managing to get mad at my family while attending Mass with them. I totally remember my mom saying, “Don’t you dare go up for Communion with that attitude,” and me feeling hurt because I had never even considered going up for Communion in such a mood.
That said, there are some places where it is nearly impossible to have proper traffic flow if people remain behind in the pews or even standing up out in the aisle. I suspect the custom of “blessings” comes from that, as well as from “do what everybody else is doing” visitors of other faiths.
Personally, I don’t care one way or the other, as I’ve seen both done reverently. But obviously, rubrics rule over whatever I think — which is what rubrics are for.
However, I have a wheelchair-bound non-Catholic friend who likes to go to Mass with me when we attend the same events on the weekend. I must say, the “crossed hands over breast” thing is a helpfully dignified signal that she doesn’t want Communion brought to her.
(At least once, in a very traditional parish, she actually had to resort to covering her mouth and shaking her head to persuade folks that she really wasn’t going to take Communion. In retrospect, I suspect the fact she was wearing a hat may have influenced their belief that she wanted to take Communion on the tongue….)
If one is unable to get to confession in a timely manner, one can still stay in the pews and offer their emotional suffering for not being able to recieve to our Lord. The ONLY reason people seem to come up with is that is makes them feel good. One should not feel good for being in a state where one cannot recieve. If it takes 7 weeks to see a priest for confession, then that’s 7 weeks where you get to feel like crap for being a sinner. I see nothing wrong with that. I always feel lousy if I find myself in a state where I cannot recieve communion, and I don’t get up and try to “fake it” I sit in the pews and suffer the stares and glares.
Actually I stay on my knees and suffer the stares and glares.
Gelsbern,
For non-Catholics or small children receiving a blessing, what is your problem exactly? You make a fair case for Catholics in a state of sin staying in the pews, but what do you see as the harm in offering blessings for those who wouldn’t receive anyway?
And what is your reaction to JPII blessing Lutherans in this fashion, or the bishops of England acknowledging this practice, or the bishops of Asia requesting something like this?
This is not about making communion more “inclusive”, it’s about making the Mass more welcoming for all. No one additional is receiving the Eucharist.
“But why is it such a big deal to stay back in the pew?” Good question, Maureen. I don’t think it is. We have a tendency toward self-consciousness and sometimes think others are paying as much attention to us as we are to ourselves, when, in reality, they probably aren’t thinking of us at all.
Anyone who is willfully entertaining thoughts, at Communion time no less, about what bad thing you might have done that keeps you in the pew has his own problem. While the question may pop into my head when I notice others doing it, I very quickly can distract myself with the range of possible causes including positive ones such as “This person could be a candidate for reception into the Church, but not yet in full communion.” True, if I more often personally knew the pew-stayer the curiosity could be greater, but from my own experience not only the fast, but a bit of minor scrupulosity could be the cause — e.g., there really seem to be people out there who think if they remember a mortal sin they legitimately forgot to confess a new Confession is required ASAP, or that if they realize later something was objectively grave they should confess ASAP in spite of lack of full knowledge at the time. These things are so common I would never assume seemingly-upstanding so-and-so was full of dark secrets.
As someone joing the church, God willing, at Easter they’ve done this at every parish I’ve been at. I thought that it was normal until I read otherwise, then I asked my priest. I was told that part of the issue is since almost everyone comes up to communion there are two big advantages to it. One, it does allow for people to feel included and remind them of a desire that, one day, they will be able to join together with the community. Secondly, since there are very few people who don’t come to communion it keeps an entire pew full of people from being inconcienced and making some of the old ladies try to squeeze through a narrow gap between that person and the pew in front of them. He said really it’s about 5 people per mass, excluding children, so it’s not a huge number more people, it takes as much, or less, time than handing out communion, and given the lack of people that he sees at confession, he’d love that more people took a blessing rather than communion.
I remain seated if I can not receive for some reason, since that is what our Bishop has said to do. It doesn’t bother me at all, and I often just get up and move into the aisle while the rest of the folks in the pew file past. That way it doesn’t inconvenience anyone. I don’t think anyone really notices.
If at some point the Church decides that it is really okay to come forward and get a blessing, I will probably do that, sometimes.
If you see someone whom you know to be a communicating Catholic refraining from receiving the Eucharist, it might help to just assume that they were not able to keep the Eucharistic fast, and are refraining for that reason. It could very well be the case, and it keeps us from being uncharitable with our imagination.
At weddings and funerals, it is usual that many non-Catholics are in attendance–far more than at a Sunday Mass.
During wedding Massesa and funeral Masses, I always verbally invite the congregation respectively to stand, to sit, or to kneel at the appropriate times.
For example. “We will now have the first reading. Please be seated.”
After the “Holy, Holy, Holy” there will always be Catholics who automatically kneel down. Nonetheless, I say the following. “If you are not Catholic or are unable to kneel, you may be seated. At this time in the Catholic Mass, it is our practice to kneel down.”
Distribution of Communion. “At this time I invite those Catholics who wish to receive the Body (and Blood) of Christ to come forward. If you are not Catholic, you may remain seated.”
At any Mass on any occasion, at least a few persons always approach for a blessing during the distribution of Communion. I just give a blessing to them.
However, I never announce an invitation to come forward for blessings at that time, since it is not the time for blessings.
“For non-Catholics or small children receiving a blessing, what is your problem exactly?”
The part of the Mass where communion takes place is technically called the “Mass of the faithful” The part with the liturgy of the word, was called “Mass of the catechumens” Mass comes from the word missa or dismissal. In the past, before the Mass of the faithful began, the catechumens were dismissed. Then those who were in communion with the church (the faithful) then proceeded with the Liturgy of the Eucharist. This is the point in time when those who are in union with the church, and are properly disposed go up to recieve our Lord. That, in my opinion, is all it should be.
My problem with non-Catholics, and small children and those who are temporarily out of communion with the Church due to being in a state of mortal sin should not be pretending to be part of something they are not part of. Going up for a blessing is an innovation, and has no part in the liturgy of the eucharist, it’s not called the liturgy of the eucharist and blessings. Going up for the blessing, in my opinion, lessens the importance of the eucharist, which is the focal point of our faith. To me, it is the equivalent of some dude, running up for applause at the Nobel awards dinner, just because he happens to be there and wants to feel included.
Not to sound too traditionalist, but we’ve already moved our tabernacles to closets, and now we deflate the importance and honor of the eucharist because we don’t want to hurt people’s feelings? How far will it go?
“If necessary, stuff a donut in your mouth on your way out the door (making sure to let the powdered sugar stick to your lip), thus ensuring you’ve got a valid excuse.”
I’ve been known to eat something when not properly disposed to recieve communion so as to have a true explanation ready if questioned to spare us both the embarassment.
Long-time reader, first-time writer.
For what it’s worth, it’s very common (though not universal) in Australian parishes for non-Catholics and young children to take part in the communion procession with their hands clasped over their hearts and receive a blessing. This is not only a local-parish custom – it was done at the Sydney Cathedral at the memorial mass for Pope John Paul II.
Prior to my first communion as a convert, I sat in the pews while everyone else went up to receive. However, given the VERY tight seating arrangements in that particular parish, I wound up with people having to climb over me, which slowed things down and was rather uncomfortable for all involved. So, I started going up for a blessing (after noticing a few others doing so)in order to alleviate those issues. I suppose I could have sat on the outside of the pew and stood while the folks came back to sit after receiving, but that didn’t occur to me at the time.
I know that some places have incorrectly instructed people to come up for a blessing and to signal their wish for one (instead of communion) by crossing their hands over their hearts.
The problem with that gesture is that for Vietnamese Catholics that is quite similar to their ordinary way of praying and of receiving communion.
Here in San Diego, where we have a very large Vietnamese Catholic population, I always look up to see if the person who has come up to me with hands crossed at the chest might look Vietnamese.
This gesture is also a problem in that some Eastern Catholics use this gesture when receiving communion directly in the mouth.
The long and short of it is that no one, priest or otherwise, ought to ever invite people to come up for a blessing during the time for giving communion.
If someone happens to show up apparently wanting a blessing, I just give a blessing.
Nonetheless, it is always wrong to invite people to do so.
There is an Eastern practice of distributing ordinary blessed bread (not the Eucharist) to anyone who wants it AFTER the liturgy is entirely over.
However, as for a blessing, at the close of Mass the priest blesses everyone anyway.
I didn’t read through all the comments, but I find this practice strange. We bless everyone at the end of Mass. It seems ridiculous to bless oem people twice. Also, why do we feel it necessary for everyone to come forward at communion time. It is perfectly acceptable for anyone to stay in their seats – remember the diea that we should be prepared, have fatsed, and be is a state of grace to receive communion? There’s no shame in not being prepared.
I strongly dislike this practice, and feel silly every time someone comes to me with arms folded. I bless them, but feel very silly.
One way of fixing this problem is to bring back the altar rail and make the people kneel to receive the Eucharist. I’ll bet no one will want to go up and kneel on the hard ol’ altar rail to receive a blessing that comes 10 minutes later!
My family has a semi-Jansenist streak to it anyway, when I was a kid whenever my mom used to yell at us she would then accuse us of making her unable to go to Communion… of course now we weren’t able to go either until after confession.
I’ve never gone up for a blessing (or Communion, for that matter) – myself being currently in RCIA – in church, except for at our RCIA retreat when our priest said a mass with only the RCIA candidates/catechumen/team members/co-ordinators present, in the small church attached to the retreat. All the candidates and catechumen went up for a blessing, when everyone else was taking communion, as at least half of the people present at this mass were unconfirmed. On this occasion it added a total of about two minutes to a mass lasting around about forty minutes.
Wow.
Okay, first the caveat: I am a Baptist. So, be ye warned therefore. Heh.
I find myself surprised at the need to not “interrupt” the mass. Time constraints and the like should be at best secondary to meeting the liturgical responsibility of blessing all commers. Certainly the table is barred from those who are not Catholic. I get that. Really.
But the concern for time seems a might misguided. And though attending mass is its own blessing, a variety of “occular communion” presents its own difficulties, does it not?
How difficult is it to place your hand on the head of one in need of blessing and say “The Lord be with you?” Isn’t there a pastoral responsibility in this somewhere?
I know, as a Baptist I probably have my responsibilities reversed. One thing we do in my congregation is have ministers off to the side who can provide blessings during communion. So, if you want to come up, but not receive communion, you can go to the side altar and recieve a blessing there.
Thanks for letting the heretic post.
Peace and all good things,
Interesting. Before this evening, I never even knew there was such a controversy over the issue. But then, I haven’t been many places other than the parish I attend, and I’m not even Catholic, so that may explain it.
When I first started attending Mass, I didn’t go up for a blessing. I didn’t know there was even the possibility. And when my friend asked me if I wanted to, I declined, if only for the fact that it would have been uncomfortable for me. My thinking was “I’m not Catholic, that’s not something I should do.” And I still have that view- if you’re not Catholic, it’s not something you should do.
But here’s the complication that I’ve run into. What about those who so dearly WANT to be Catholic, such as myself? When I finally realized the Real Present of Christ in the Blessed Eucharist, I accepted my friends invitation for a blessing. Now, to be honest, I’m not all the worried about the blessing. In fact, I hardly realize that I’m recieving one, because I am so entranced and awed by the fact the I am so close to My Lord. I can’t put into words… just being able to come Christ, to bow my head at His presence, and then move on… it is miraculous, truly, it is. It may very well be the only thing that keeps me sane, this great Blessing from the Lord, to be close to Him. I can not explain how terribly painful it is not to be able to recieve Him in Communion- I have yet a year still to wait until this time comes! My solace is in approaching the Lord of my Life, and being able to Adore Him for the few seconds it takes for the Priest to give the blessing (which is no longer than it takes for one to recieve Communion, I have noticed).
But now that I hear that it is possibly wrong to go up for such a blessing, I am confused. It would be even more painful for me not too, but if that is the suffering I am called to for the sake of Christ, then I will of course submit myself to it.
As a soon to be convert, I was told by the parish I attended that I was allowed to go up for a blessing. Last Sunday, I did this. Father was looking down at the time and offered me the Eucharist, I had to shake my head(even though I did have my arms crossed) and then he recognized me and gave me a blessing. It was nice, feeling more a part of things. But it was uncomfortable also, and more agonizing to be so close to receiving my Lord and having to say no when offered. I felt like I was somehow betraying Him, even though I know there’s no way I could have accepted. I don’t think this practice is a good one. Not everyone would be like I was and decline when offered. If anything, it might make the unconfirmed more likely to receive the Eucharist because of their desire to do so. That should be avoided at all costs.
But it was uncomfortable also, and more agonizing to be so close to receiving my Lord and having to say no when offered.
Reminds me of Scott Hahn’s conversion story!
He couldn’t wait until he became Catholic and could actually receive the Blessed Lord in the Holy Eucharist!
No one has referrred to the liturgical book, Book of Blessings. In its general introduction:
“28. Because some blessings have a special relationship to the sacraments, they may sometimes be joined with the celebration of Mass.
This book specifies what such blessings are and the part or rite with which they are to be joined; it also provides norms that may not be disregarded. No blessings except those so specified may be joined with the eucharistic celebration.”
(Book of Blessings, Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1989, ISBN 0-8146-1875-8, page xxx).
So it is not just a case of the Roman Missal being silent about the subject. The Book of Blessings has a prohibition.
I had attended Catholic Mass for several year before being confirmed. Believing that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist I felt the need to approach the Host and respectfully bow before my Lord. Knowing that there was a long time of people I tried not to stay long enough for the Priest to bless me. Some Priests would motion to offer a blessing and others not. I think I may have offended some Priests in not “staying put” long enough for them to offer their blessings. Although I am grateful for the Preists blessings when it was offered my motive was to offer my respect to the real presence of Christ and not receive a blessing from the Priest.
Is Christ not really present in the Eucharist? Should we not encourage the laity to come forward and show respect?
I definately agree with Fr. Stephanos on this one. I’m a traditionalist and do often leave after the reading of the gospel when i’m in a state of mortal sin or i kneel quietly and pray for the grace of perserverence. I am reminded of Christ showing Sr. Josefa a soul that had sin upon it and it’s reaction when He tried to draw closer to it. (He was explaining to her the nature of His Mercy and why the souls suffered through Purgatory). The more he entreated the soul to come to Him the more it backed away in terror from its own sinful state. He told Sr. Josefa that if it were possible, that soul would plunge itself into the deepest pit of Hell in order to expiate its sins as fast as possible rather than offend Him in the slightest way by clinging to them.
Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf. Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; Canon 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).