One of the trends in the last four decades is confusing the priesthood of the faithful and the ordained priesthood.
Concerns about swine flu have prompted many parishes to discontinue the routine administration of the Precious Blood. Okay, fine.* But there’s another Communion rite practice that should also cease if only out of concerns for public health. This time, however, it’s a practice that (unlike distribution from the Cup) is an abuse per se, namely, that of lay ministers of holy Communion purporting to confer “blessings-in-lieu-of-Communion” on every Tom, Pat, and Harriet who comes up in line.
Lay ministers of holy Communion (by definition, extraordinary ministers thereof), in response to people approaching them without the intention to receive Communion (maybe such folks are non-Catholics** or are Catholic kids prior to First Communion), currently do one of three things: they (1) speak and gesture a sign of the cross over such folks, or (2) lay hands on such persons’ heads or shoulders while voicing a blessing, or (3) waive the Eucharist over them while purporting to confer a blessing. I think all three actions are liturgical abuses.
Let’s consider them in order of gravity:
Ed Peters’ goes further in explaining why this is a liturgical abuse and why they have no authority to give blessings.
This has been a growing trend in parishes and in my own experience is quite common now. The first time I saw this practice I knew immediately that it was wrong because it confuses the blessing of the ordained priesthood and the type of blessing we can give.
At one parish they had a monthly blessing of blankets that were given to people who were sick. The priest would do a blessing of these blankets at the end of Mass and then had the laity hold out their hands also at the same time. The Nazi looking salute was bad enough in a Catholic parish, but the theology of this is quite confuses. The practice teaches something that is not true.
First off I don’t think there should be any blessings of persons who can’t receive Communion at this point even by the priest. There is a final blessing at Mass which does indeed give a blessing to everyone. There is no theological reason to do a blessing in the Communion line for those who can’t receive. There is of course the pastoral aspect and a desire to include everybody. I can certainly understand why this practice developed and the good intention behind it. What we should be doing instead is teaching what the final blessing really is and teaching the difference between the priestly blessing and the blessing for example parents can give their children.
What really annoys me about this practice is that surely the priest in most cases knows that the the EMHC’s are not allowed to do this. The theology behind priestly blessings and what the liturgical books say is not exactly a closely guarded secret. Like most bad practices they occur with the priest turning a blind eye to go along.
The problem is also fairly widespread based on anecdotal evidence of my hearing this topic on Catholic radio when people call up asking about it. This would be a good thing for the USCCB’s Committee on Divine Worship to address while it is still in the relatively early stages. Oh well how else can we hear the crickets?
20 comments
As a Protestant, I respect the True Church when I hear the conditions to receive communion, and accept why I cannot receive it. All I want to say is that, if the blankets are to be blessed, can it not include the bringing of their recipients into God’s Faith?
We all need help.
Ah yes, the lost verses of Matthew 5:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not receive the Eucharist unless you are in a state of grace.’ But I say to you, don’t even receive a blessing from your fellow Christian lest you cast doubt on the sprititual superiority of the priest.”
Mark 9:38-41
John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.” Jesus replied, “Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me. For whoever is not against us is for us. Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
Well, I’ll let the canon lawyers be canon lawyers, it’s not my training. Neither is liturgy. And I’ll admit making the sign of the cross in the air or waving the Eucharist seems wrongheaded and (in the second case) even blasphemous. However, I’ve never actually ***seen that happen***. The churches I attend usually offer a simple prayer while touching the person’s head or shoulder (i.e. “May our God bless you and keep you.”) When someone asks for such a prayer and receives it from a fellow Christian, it’s awfully hard for me to swallow that as a liturgical abuse.
As long as I hear Protestants raising holy heck about not being able to receive with everyone else when they go to a Catholic mass with friends, I think the distinction between priest and laity is pretty darn clear. The blessing doesn’t “cut it” for them…or speak to inclusion in the way they wish.
Anyhoo, my two cents.
The blessing thing does not make much sense – though it does raise a legitimate question as to what to do with children too young to receive or abandon in the pew.
The hands crossed position does offer some logistical advantage. Namely, I can clamp my hands over my child’s and prevent them from stealing a host while I receive on the tongue.
This certainly beats the “family togetherness” nonsense of first communion while the family stands around in a semi-circle holding the eucharist until all can receive together. The thought of holding the eucharist for an extended period of time while trying to keep children from running off and/or stealing a host just sends shivers down my spine.
I’m not fond of the blessing during communion thing but it does make it easier to conceal being in a state of mortal sin.
It’s also fairly impractical given the way users herd people into the communion lines – once you find yourself in one, and are aware that you shouldn’t receive, this is a pretty fair accomodation.
I’m an EMHC and I don’t do “blessings” – if someone approaches me with their arms crossed over their chest, I say nothing but trace a tiny cross on their forehead and send them on their way.
This has always bothered me as well. But I found myself on the other side recently as I started helping out as an EMHC in the last couple of months. I had somoene clearly come up for a blessing. At that point, it seemed rather rude to just stand there. I did say “God bless you” and that seemed to be sufficient.
Part of the problem is the communion procession itself. When the usher gets to your pew, it is clearly your turn to go up. I realize it would be a logistical nightmare, but there would be less pressure to leave your pew (and perhaps be tempted to receive communion unworthily), if the “communion line” were more like the “confession line.” You go when you are ready.
I’m a EM and I don’t do blessings. No one comes to my line if they are looking for a blessing; they go to the priest. But if one does, now that I am aware it may happen, I’m telling them to go over to the Father. It wouldn’t occur to me to bless them. By what authority? I could pray for them, but that’s not why they come to the line to receive.
On going up for Communion like the confession line: We do this in my church and I have to say it’s a disaster in my view. When the priest steps down to start giving out Communion, people practically RUN from the back of the church, regardless of those in the first pews getting up to receive. To make matters worse, they don’t hav a habit of letting those in pews in front of them in! It’s shockingly rude, since I’ve always waited for the pew I’m in to go up. Our pastor, who I really like, feels betwixt and between on it. One one hand he likes that it’s like everyone rushing up to Jesus for Communion; on the other, he’s a very orderly person and it drives him nuts. I think he is re-evaluating it.
Lots of priesthood/Scripture stuff here:
pursuingthesummit.blogspot.com
Debunks that Protestant “sole priesthood of the believer” thing with the Scriptures, specifically in Priesthood and Light of Almonds posts.
That’s funny. Every time I’ve been to Communion without benefit of ushers, everything works out just fine. It’s sort of like when the traffic light goes down. It’s weird at first, but order prevails.
Also, where are these churches where people are forced to get in line? When the user comes to let people out, just move your legs out of the way and let people pass. Or, file out of the pew with everyone else and then just go right back in.
This blessing during Mass by everyone and anyone seems to not be anything bad if we didn’t have a Priest there. If there was no Priest then it would be no problem to have us each ask God to bless us, yet when there is a Priest it is a rejection of the gift that Christ has given us in the Priesthood. We should embrace the gift of the presence of a Priest of God and humble ourselves to the Ordained Priesthood.
In the same way when I send my kids off to School I will certainly give them a blessing, but if I am in Mass I will await the blessing from the Priest. It is an issue of acknowledging the actions of Jesus in creating the Priesthood.
Of course if we are not Catholic we could just argue verses out of the Bible but as Catholics we should embrace the gift of the Ordained Priesthood to serve us. To ignore that and elevate my own universal Priesthood to do the group blessing thing is arrogant and an insult to the gift Jesus has given us. We should humble ourselves and express our faith as it has been given to us from our mothers and fathers in the faith.
“The Nazi looking salute…”
Thats what goes through my mind everytime I see it. Wonder how long before some wingnut accuses Catholics of being Nazi sleeper cells?
Hmm. I’m pretty tough about these issues, but I don’t see anything wrong with this. As a layperson I pray for people, ask them to pray for me… I even “bless” folks if they do something really great (“God bless you!”). Also if they sneeze.
I don’t see how this causes the slightest problem. Or is it merely that people could get the wrong idea? Well, if we started changing the Mass every time that somebody could get the wrong idea about something, we’d never get started.
Jeff:
Your headline “Muddling the priesthood” is directly related to the notion of taking RESPONSABILITY and enforcing OBEDIENCE, not only with bla-bla.
Please read what I posted in the American Papist:
You commented before: ‘One comment of (Vatican’s Prefect) Abp. Burke’s in particular, where he called Notre Dame’s decision a “source of the greatest scandal”, was greeted with thunderous and prolonged applause’.
Previously I posted in your blog an open letter to a Bishop friend of mine: “The Bishop D’Arcy and Rome are RESPONSIBLE of Notre Dame using the NAME CATHOLIC, and crowing their GIVING A CATHOLIC HONOR TO GENOCIDAL LEADER Obama, whom in 100 days gave dozens of measures to industrialize human embryos & abortions. He raised from 80 to 980 million the budget of the abortion chambers, going full steam…”
MY POINT IS: Will our beloved Benedict XVI be charged on giving a CATHOLIC HONOR to the most historically OPEN-scandalous genocide? In other words: can’t you extract a ‘talk the talk AND walk the walk’ of… TAKING RESPONSIBILITY, from dear Arch. Burke, minding WHO our enemies are going to point out in registered HISTORY?
Cordially
…the Swine flu also prohibits us from holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer…
Dear Jeff, Your reasoning against this practice is spot on. A recent letter from a Vatican official to a private individual confirms your reasoning (and I presume Dr. Peter’s – haven’t read his piece yet).
After all it’s the “Communion Line” not the “blessing line.”
http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur263.htm
Hmm. I’m pretty tough about these issues, but I don’t see anything wrong with this. As a layperson I pray for people, ask them to pray for me… I even “bless” folks if they do something really great (“God bless you!”). Also if they sneeze.
I don’t see how this causes the slightest problem. Or is it merely that people could get the wrong idea? Well, if we started changing the Mass every time that somebody could get the wrong idea about something, we’d never get started.
Briefly the problem is that it is a falsehood. Praying for someone or saying, “God bless you” is not a blessing. A blessing invokes the prayer and graces of the entire Church upon the person or thing blessed. Only the ordained posses that “power” so to speak. So, not would people get the wrong idea in lay “blessing”, they’d be getting the wrong reality.
One of these days, I’ll use the preview and proofread. Please extend my italics all the way to: “…we’d never get started.” Also, last sentence should read: “So, not only would people get the wrong idea in lay “blessing”, they’d be getting the wrong reality.
There is a recent letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments that is mentioned in a Q&A on http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur263.htm
The main points of that letter:
1. The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.
2. 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; can. 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).
3. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands — which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here — by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged.
4. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, n. 84, “forbids any pastor, for whatever reason to pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry.” To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.
5. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).