Communion Procession Blessings Revisited

For a while there have been discussions of the appropriateness of non-communicants participating in the communion procession and receiving a blessing from the minister. This topic was even discussed (albeit somewhat obliquely) on PrayTellBlog a couple of years ago. Opinions on the appropriateness of the practice have not necessarily fallen out along the usual ideological lines, with some “progressives” objecting to the pactice (e.g. “The communion procession is for communion, not blessings”), though my impression is that opposition tends to emanate from more conservative quarters. Maybe thisis because of Archbishop Chaput’s criticism of the practice when he was the Ordinary in Denver, and the endorsement of his view by some more traditional bloggers.

But not all traditionally-oriented Catholics seem to take this view:

I would like to add another practical suggestion. In many countries it has become customary for persons who are not able to receive communion (for example, the members of other confessions) to approach the altar with their hands folded over their chests, making it clear that they are not receiving the sacrament but are asking for a blessing, which is given to them as a sign of the love of Christ and of the Church. This form could certainly be chosen also by persons who are living in a second marriage and therefore are not admitted to the Lord’s table. The fact that this would make possible an intense spiritual communion with the Lord, with his whole Body, with the Church, could be a spiritual experience that would strengthen and help them.

The above is from the addendum Pope Benedict/Josef Ratzinger recently added to his 1972 article on communion for the divorced and civilly remarried in preparing it for publication in his collected works. You can read the entire addition here. Aside from the specific issue of why people might not be receiving communion, this certainly counts as a highly-placed endorsement of communion line blessings.

Fritz Bauerschmidt

I am a professor of Theology at Loyola University Maryland and a permanent deacon of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, assigned to the Cathedral of Mary Our Queen.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

25 responses to “Communion Procession Blessings Revisited”

  1. Jack Feehily

    The “communion procession” has a richer significance than a line of people on the way to receiving Holy Communion. Some of are parents accompanied by children not yet old enough to be united to Christ sacrament ally. Others include non-catholic spouses and baptized adults preparing to be received into full communion. Some are Catholics who are impeded by discipline or who have simply chosen not to receive at this Mass. They all have in common a call to holiness and a desire to live in communion with Christ and the members of his body. And so a custom has arisen in countless places throughout the world to extend a gesture of hospitality/welcome/blessing to such individuals. Sadly, some “little monsters”, the clerical masters of the rules, have told their congregants the the communion procession is only for those receiving sacramental communion. Even those who hold Pope Benedict as one of their heroes. Perhaps this quote will give them pause.

    Reply
  2. Karl Liam Saur

    Well, in recent years, I also think that, subconsciously, hygienic concerns about cross-contamination may have arisen: ministers of Holy Communion have been sensitized to the need to keep their fingers/hands sanitized during the administration of the sacrament. I’ve seen a dramatic ebbing of the practice compared to a decade ago, and I don’t hear much in the way of complaint about that shift.

    That said, it is a useful alternative in situations – especially funerals – where many people (including family) in attendance are not necessarily receiving the sacrament but failure to join the procession is logistically difficult (that is, in tight rows, people having to get by others) or where failure to receive by close family members would be particularly conspicuous in a church that is not filled for Sunday worship.

    Reply
  3. Mike Burns

    I noticed at Archbishop Cupich’s installation mass that we was making the sign of the cross on communicants foreheads who were in line but did not want to receive.

    Reply
  4. Jim McKay

    Doesn’t this create an equivalence among these people? People of other denominations are the same as those in second marriages, ie both are sinners, or neither are, or both disagree with how the Church judges their lives, etc.

    This will sound snarky, but it is not entirely meant that way. How about if those who may not receive come forward and bless the ministers of communion? There is some defect here, and it may be on the side of those who decide who can receive as well as on the side of those who are excluded. There should be some humility on everyone’s part.

    Prey for us, that all may be one.

    Reply
  5. Todd Flowerday

    Good, I guess.

    When I train ministers of Communion, I suggest that when approached by a person with crossed hands or arms or a young child, they place the heel of their hand on the upper forehead, but say no words.

    When I spoke with parents of First Reconciliation penitents the other week, I also suggested they could approach any confessor and ask for a blessing if they did not choose to confess.

    These are good opportunities for people to reflect on what their brothers and sisters are doing when they approach God for grace, be it sacramental or otherwise. The “little monsters” need to swallow pride and suck it up for the team.

    Reply
  6. John Drake

    Alas, even the pope-emeritus can make mistakes.

    Reply
  7. Jack Feehily

    I instruct communion ministers to place a hand on the heads of little ones with no words; and for older children and adults to place a hand lightly on their upper arm or shoulder and in a whisper say “May God bless you”. That’s also what I do. It’s simple, it’s short, and people immensely appreciate it.

    Reply
  8. Roger Pieper

    With no disrespect toward others who have earnestly addressed this pastoral situation, I feel that these communion “blessings” need to either be more fully developed or not done at all. There already is a blessing at the end of Mass, so the “May God bless you” is redundant. As for the silent laying of the hand, this gesture alone seems awkward theologically and liturgically to say the least.

    If we wish to incorporate non-sacramental communicants into the communion rite, the question needs to be framed by what is happening in the liturgy at that moment. If it is communion with Christ and his mystical body, then these “blessings” should show that. One possible way is if the minister would say something like “May your union with (the Body of) Christ ever increase” to which one could respond Amen. This wouldn’t be a blessing but a joint prayer for greater union so the whole question on ordained vs lay can be avoided. Such a prayer would provide greater practice and reverance for children who have not received their first communion as well. Just a thought for making this more meaningful.

    Reply
  9. Jordan Zarembo

    I would not be comfortable being touched by a EMHC without advanced warning. Touch is a very intimate matter, and should not be taken lightly. I understand there are some highly extroverted people who have a demonstrative urge to touch others. I politely and firmly tell them not to touch me on the arm, for example.

    Blessings are the prerogative of the clergy (the threefold major orders). I understand that this statement is clericalist and perhaps even sexist to some people. I have received blessings from a woman Anglican priest, for what it’s worth. Now that I have reverted to Catholicism, I accept that the clergy is comprised of men (viri) who retain special ritual abilities. I can’t change this.

    It would be better for those who wish to receive a blessing present themselves to a priest or deacon for a ritual blessing (i.e. get in a line with a priest or deacon at the end). This does not mean, in my view, that EMHCs are inferior to the clergy in human dignity, or that EMHCs do not serve God worthily at Mass. EMHCs simply cannot give the ritual blessing, and the substitutes mentioned do not offer the same spiritual efficacy.

    Also, the sacerdotal and diaconal blessing do not require touch. This is more welcoming for people who are not interested in tactile feedback.

    Reply
    1. Jonathan How

      @Jordan Zarembo – comment #8:
      While the benedictional indicates that an ordained minister presides at a blessing, when present, it also indicates that lay people may bless by virtue of their office (the clearest example of which is the blessing of children by their parents). The rites explain that this takes place not by delegation but ‘in virtue of the universal priesthood’ and their office (n.18)
      There would seem little reason therefore not to extend the faculty to bless to EMHC along with the faculty to distribute communion, as the same motive of pastoral need would apply.

      Reply
      1. Jordan Zarembo

        @Jonathan How – comment #10:

        The blessing that a parent can give a child by virtue of baptismal prerogative is not, in my view, applicable between unrelated brothers and sisters in Christ. Neither one of my parents is an EMHC, or have ever been one. In fact, neither would ever consider being one. Therefore, I will never meet an EMHC who can bless me as my father or mother would in a domestic context.

        Per CCC 1669, the scope of lay blessings is quite circumscribed as compared to the blessings of clergy. The blessings of the clergy are many and ex opere operato: the exorcism of water, the blessings of Baptism, the episcopal (and occasionally sacerdotal) blessing of Confirmation, and most certainly, the blessing of the eucharistic prayer. This list is certainly not complete. Why then would one consider any blessing of the clergy, even a priest’s Final Blessing of Mass, as equal to the very limited abilities of lay persons to bless one another?

        Perhaps it would be best to optionally restore the blessing Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam […] (“May the body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul unto eternal life”) to priests and deacons, along with the lifting of the host slightly above the ciborium and the sign of the cross made with the Eucharist. This blessing could be given to non-communicants, as they would be blessed by the Eucharist, which is objective grace. For the sake of expediency, “the Body of Christ” could be said to communicants.

        I realize that blessings at the communion is a fraught issue. Even so, distinctions do exist, and it is ultimately not productive to pretend otherwise with ad hoc innovations. Also, statements that lay blessings are “pastorally necessary” ring hollow when a celebrant is required to administer communion unless he is physically unable. These occasions are rare, and do not justify routine blessings by EMHCs.

      2. Todd Flowerday

        @Jordan Zarembo – comment #14:
        There is a distinction between a formal liturgical blessing and what routinely is exchanged among lay people. Clergy stand before a worshiping assembly and impart a blessing in a ritual way. This is distinctive, regardless of complaints from reform2: clergy wear vestments, they impart blessings from a text, from an elevated place, and usually are audible.

        Lay people routinely bless one another individually: parents to children, spouse to spouse, and in other significant ways with or without a sign or spoken invocation.

        It is a reality in many American parishes that blessings or recognitions of sorts occur at the end of the Communion procession. They no longer qualify as ad hoc innovations. We no longer live in a liturgical climate in which there will be much support for dispensing with them where they have begun and persist.

        The question now is how to handle them for the future. That is where the discussion can steer and form an optimal liturgical and pastoral practice.

      3. Paul Inwood

        @Todd Flowerday – comment #15:

        Lay people routinely bless one another individually: parents to children, spouse to spouse, and in other significant ways with or without a sign or spoken invocation.

        Yes, and whenever anyone says “Bless you!” if a person sneezes they are also invoking a blessing.

        I think a lot of the uptightness around blessings would resolve itself if we would only remember that it’s not the person “giving” the blessing who is actually “doing” the blessing. Only God can bless; we can’t, not even the ordained. Hence a priest will say “May Almighty God bless you…” and not “I bless you”.

        The questions then become these: given that we invoke God’s blessing on people and on objects, buildings…., which of those blessings are reserved to the clergy, or should be reserved to the clergy, or should not be reserved to the clergy? And how do we stop people thinking of blessings as some kind of transubstantiation? And how we do stop people treating the person giving the blessing as somehow giving added value to it (e.g. why should a rosary blessed by the pope be any more valuable than one blessed by your parish priest?) ?

    2. Todd Flowerday

      @Jordan Zarembo – comment #8:
      In my parish, you would be presenting yourself for a touch, unless you remained in your seat, making your spiritual communion there. If you were a one-off guest, it’s less likely you would “intrude” on a local custom of which you were unaware.

      There are good reasons why I don’t form Communion ministers to raise a hand, or speak a word when acknowledging a non-receiving communicant.

      The spiritual efficacy, by the way, is wholly dependent on God and on the communicant’s receptivity to God’s grace.

      Reply
  10. Fr. Jack Feehily

    May I presume that when people return again and again after being gently touched that this practice is in no way offensive or obtrusive? I deliberately described this gesture as a “blessing” that expresses hospitality and welcome. The blessing at the end of Mass is another matter entirely.

    Reply
  11. Allen Corrigan

    It seems to me that the gesture/posture of hands crossed over the chest is confusing, because this is how some Christians receive communion, including Byzantine Catholics who may licitly participate in the procession and reception of communion.

    The recent backpedaling with respect to the 1972 essay seems to be much less about the practice of blessing during the procession than it is about endorsing the denial of communion to remarried Catholics (sans annulment).

    A danger of the individual blessing during the procession in lieu of communicating is that it may cause a devaluation of communion itself. The mindset of receiving “either communion or a blessing” may tend to undermine the essential distinction between the two actions.

    Reply
  12. Fritz Bauerschmidt Avatar
    Fritz Bauerschmidt

    Jordan Zarembo : The blessings of the clergy are many and ex opere operato: the exorcism of water, the blessings of Baptism, the episcopal (and occasionally sacerdotal) blessing of Confirmation, and most certainly, the blessing of the eucharistic prayer.

    Certainly the exorcism of water–a sacramental–does not work ex opere operato, at least as far as the conferral of grace goes.

    Reply
    1. Jordan Zarembo

      @Fritz Bauerschmidt – comment #16:

      Thank you Deacon Fritz for the correction. So, would the exorcism of water be akin to a layperson’s blessing so far as neither are ex opere operato with regard to the conferral of grace?

      Reply
      1. Fritz Bauerschmidt Avatar
        Fritz Bauerschmidt

        @Jordan Zarembo – comment #18:
        Jordan, I’m not really sure how to parse the difference between a clerical blessing and a layperson’s blessing in a case like this. I’m pretty sure that the blessing of water is one of those that is reserved for a priest or deacon, though I don’t know what the theological rationale is.

  13. Rev. Dan Hesko

    I really don’t get it. The Communion ‘procession’ is for one thing only, to receive Holy Communion. It reminds me of my early days in parish life when everything but the kitchen sink was being brought up for the offertory. Suficent is the final Benediction of Mass to give a blessing to All present.

    Reply
  14. Fr Richard Peers

    Mmm. This is quite complicated. Practice has certainly overtaken theory. I dislike these blessings and when I am at a Mass where i am not communicating (i.e. in a Roman Catholic church) I never go up for a blessing. However, there is something rather lovely about the blessing of small children and even of those who come up for other – usually unknown – reasons, they are seeking the Lord in some way.
    Since most of my priestly life has been spent working with teenagers I really recommend a hand on the shoulder rather than the head, it is so much less intrusive.

    Reply
  15. Sean Whelan

    I easily fall into the obedient to Vatican II/forward looking camp, and I have no use for this practice. Working in a parish with a school makes it all the more clear to me that this is just silly. Half of the kids are going up for a blessing. The pastor LOVES blessing the kids of course and happily places his hands on all the kids heads. Lord knows the germs he’s picking up. Lice seems to be rampant at this age too.

    It diminishes the final (and sometimes Solemn) blessing and dismissal, and it plays into the need to “get something” when you go to Mass.

    Reply
  16. Ian Coleman

    Perhaps the way forward is to restrict this sort of blessing to those (mainly children) who being prepared for First Communion. The rationale, and pastoral justification would be clearer, in that the ritual action would clearly be ‘transitional’ in nature – perhaps analogous to a ‘Scrutiny’ (given that this latter – largely invented – rite nowadays bears little resemblance to its supposed Early Church model).

    Reply
  17. Scott Pluff

    My 4-year old daughter receives a blessing from the priest or EMHC every week in our home parish, and it’s the highlight of the whole experience for her. When we went to Mass at another parish, the priest just glared at her while she stood there waiting to be blessed and she left very disappointed. If parishes A, B and C in your town have this as a longstanding practice and parish D takes a stand to not do it, parish D just looks like a jerk. Now if we mention the possibility of going back to this parish, our 4-year old says, NO! Makes you wonder how many other families they have run off from an already declining parish.

    In training EMHCs, I have a moderate suggestion. Avoid the perils of lay people giving blessings by doing this instead: Bend down to the child’s level, smile, and say, “Peace be with you.” A pat on the shoulder is optional. There is no prohibition against lay people acting hospitable toward one another, contrary to what Fr. Glaring Angrily might suggest.

    Reply
  18. Brendan Kelleher SVD

    Blessing those who for a whole range of reasons cannot receive Communion has been customary here in Japan for as long as I’ve been here – since 1976. Once or twice “rumblings” from different quarters both far and near have seen more formal discussions of the practice, including most recently at this year’s national gathering of diocesan liturgical directors. The liturgy commission of the Yokohama diocese shared a very comprehensive position paper on the topic that proved very helpful – only in Japanese so I won’t quote it, but touches on many of the points raised in this post and the comments. The consensus was that there was no reason to discontinue the practice, and that asking for a formal clarification from Rome would only result in lengthy and tedious correspondence. The pastoral sensitivity shown by Benedict XVI seems to be strikingly absent in some of the comments, but then I noted that they were written by commenters whom I have tagged as “the usual suspects” in such matters.

    Reply

Posted

in

by

Fritz Bauerschmidt

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading