Fr. Hamilton at Catholic Ragemonkey has posted an interesting anecdote about a non-Catholic who tried to receive Holy Communion from him. While I agree with most of his points, something he said at the end disturbed me.
"[T]he line for Holy Communion is only for those actually receiving Holy Communion…[and] is not for blessings of kids or RCIA people or non-Catholic visitors, but only for the reception of Holy Communion."
I do not understand why those wishing to make an act of spiritual communion should be discouraged from seeking a blessing. Actually, I don't see why anyone should be discouraged from entering the communion line, so long as they are respectful and reverent. Any thoughts?
Funky Dung
Comments 11
If you read through the comments the post has generated, he explains himself a little more on that point.
My over-all thought is that I agree with Father Hamilton… and that it's not necessarily discouraging someone from seeking a blessing, but rather encouraging them to seek one at an appropriate time.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 12:17 am ¶There is also always a blessing given at the end of the Mass so there is no valid reason for someone to receive a blessing in the Communion line.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 1:11 am ¶Well, this is one of the reasons I'm Presbyterian! Anyone who accepts Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior is welcome at our table.
Solves the problem quite nicely, I think.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 4:16 am ¶Er, given the rather massive differences between Catholic and Presbyterian understandings of the Eucharist, it's not surprising that there are such big differences between Catholic and Presbyterian guidelines for admittance to Communion.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 4:26 am ¶Thanks for the comments. It's especially cool to see people "delurking". I have a lot of respect for Jeff and Fr. Jim's blogs and it's exciting to know they read mine.
Getting back to the topic, are there specific canonical injunctions against communion blessings? I'd be interested to know the bases for deeming them inappropriate. This is quite a startling revelation for me. When I was just beginning to investigate the Catholic Church, and continuing through my time in RCIA, I was not only invited but encouraged to seek such blessings. I would consider the priests who gave me the advice (fathers of the Pittsburgh Oratory) to be thoroughly orthodox and exemplary. They're not the type to speak or act on opposition to Church law.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 4:49 am ¶F.D.: Thanks for linking the post. You seem interested, so I will share some more thoughts. First, please understand that this topic is not a matter of doctrine and should not be used to judge anyone's "orthodoxy". I never intended that at all. Your comment here stated: "I would consider the priests who gave me the advice … to be thoroughly orthodox and exemplary. They're not the type to speak or act on opposition to Church law." Please don't think ill of or doubt those priests. That's not what I am trying to say. In the realm of things, the topic of my post is far down on the list of importance. The Church is not suffering because some priests give blessings at Holy Communion. My position that blessings in the line for Holy Communion are inappropriate stems from identifying the goal for that part of the Holy Mass. That particular moment of the Holy Mass is the summit where all focus should be on Holy Communion and, for those in a state of grace, its worthy reception. Quite simply we can say, the Sacred Liturgy never envisions that other things are going on with that line. That's all I mean by my position. In addition, doing other things in the line (my giving blessings) could be, it seems to me, counterproductive to the focus that should be placed on the Holy Eucharist (in other words, my priestly blessing in no way replaces reception of Holy Communion). I am always happy to bless children and other non-communicants, simply not at that moment in Mass. After Mass seems the more appropriate time to seek an individual blessing. Notice, too, I am not saying we shouldn't give blessings for the various rites of RCIA (which, no doubt, you recall well) or other rites incorporated into Mass. However, none of those rites are ever placed within the reception of Holy Communion, but usually follow the homily. While I certainly encourage spiritual communions, that usually means one remains in his pew in prayer, uniting himself to the sacrifice and in prayer expressing his desire to receive Holy Communion (not the priest's blessing). Finally, it should be noted that the whole reason I even posted on this matter is because inviting non-communicants to come up in a line designed for reception of the Sacrament, invites some misunderstandings, confusion, sacrilege, and hurt feelings. And, when it is all said and done, when the line is for the reception of Holy Communion, should I really have to be worrying about who is who and why they are there?
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 5:41 am ¶Can you agree with both? For example, while I agree with Jeff about the blessing at the end, I do expect all our children to accompany us to the front…the older ones - who still haven´t had first communion - stand beside us, with their arms crossed across their chests, and we genuflect when the host is raised to us, they do too. we seek to instill proper behaviour in our children by modelling. And while they are going forward with us, it´s not for a blessing. That´s not to say that a priest hasn´t here and there blessed them, but it was sort of as if an afterthought, and he knew we weren´t bringing them forward for that purpose, since they are a bit behind us. Anyway, just adding a few thoughts
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 2:35 pm ¶Fr. Hamilton,
Thank you for coming here and clarifying your points.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 2:55 pm ¶< ?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> < !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> Robert: I think my original post (or a comment I added to it) responded to your fine points. Regarding non-communicant children: I am not saying they have to stay in their pews. I simply am saying they shouldn't present themselves for a blessing. I think whether a child remains in the pews while his parents leave for a few moments in the line, or whether the child comes with the parents, depends upon a few factors: the child's ability to behave in the pew without mom and pop; the child's ability to not fear that he is being left alone; and the parents desire to instill Holy Communion line etiquette in a child not yet of age to receive.
F.D.: I certainly understand the specific decision made in the wedding scenario. Again, this isn't dogma. A decision for or against blessings at Holy Communion can be tolerated. I personally would shy away from it - even in the scenario you mention - opting rather to announce before Holy Communion about the sad reality of divisions among Christians and encouraging non-communicants (as well as communicants) to pray for Christian unity. However, please understand, I would consider the practice if I could sense (along with the couple who know the audience so well) that non-communicants would take offense at remaining in the pews.
+0
Posted 18 Jan 2005 at 7:28 pm ¶About the arms-crossed-over-the-chest thingy: A number of people who actually want Communion do that down here, all of them Italian-Americans. Once I gave a pious lady who did that a blessing, and she said, "Oh, but Father, can't I receive Communion?" (I don't remember ever having paid attention to what Italians did in Rome.) I've also been told that Eastern Rite Christians do the same thing with their arms. Anyway.
+0
Posted 19 Jan 2005 at 3:59 am ¶I participated in an Eastern Rite (Ukrainian) wedding this summer and can confirm that they do indeed receive communion that way. There is a key difference, though. The Body floats in the Blood and is fed to the communicants from a spoon.
+0
Posted 19 Jan 2005 at 4:17 am ¶Post a Comment