Invitation to be blessed at communion time

[FrGareth]

There exists a widespread practice of offering a form of blessing to those who come forward in the communion procession but cannot themselves receive Holy Communion.

There is room for debate on whether this is a proper liturgical practice; our bishops endorse it in pragraph 212 of Celebrating the Mass - but various blogs 1 2 3 4 are sceptical of its legitimacy.

I do not intend to pursue that debate on THIS thread - if you wish to debate the issue of principle, there is an appropriate thread for that HERE.

Rather, I seek the advice of the members of this forum about the best form of words to be used when this practice is offered. If I am celebrating a Mass where I know many guests will be present (e.g. a funeral, or First Holy Communion), I will normally make some kind of statement of invitation immediately after drinking from the chalice, and before distributing to any Extraordinary Ministers who may be assisting.

I would be grateful for (i) your theological and pastoral reactions to the forms of words below, and (ii) any suggestions of alternative wordings which you might propose, or have seen well used in practice. Thank you.

If you are not a member of the Catholic faith, but would like to receive a blessing as Holy Communion is distributed, you are most welcome to come forwards for a blessing. To indicate your wish for a blessing, please fold your arms across your chest, like so [priest demonstrates].

Holy Communion is the most precious treasure we have in the Catholic Church. We prepare to receive this great gift by being baptised into the Catholic faith, and by making use of the sacrament of confession from time to time. If you are not a Catholic, or if you are not spiritually prepared to receive Holy Communion today, you are most welcome to come forwards for a blessing. To indicate your wish for a blessing, please fold your arms across your chest, like so [priest demonstrates].

Receiving Holy Communion at Mass is a sign of our shared faith. We recognise that Christians who belong to different churches hold different beliefs about Holy Communion. Therefore, it is not the practice of Catholic Church to offer holy communion to guests from other Christian traditions; instead, we invite you to come forwards in the communion queue for a blessing. To indicate your wish for a blessing, please fold your arms across your chest, like so [priest demonstrates].

[JW]

OK, this is a hoary one and it is easy to point out issues with all of these forms of words. These are my views as a layman, which, hopefully will get the discussion going.

Unless there is any episcopal recommendation, it has to be whatever the priest feels most comfortable within the pastoral context of the particular Mass. What is one seeking to achieve with the invitation to a blessing (as opposed to saying nothing)? I can think of 2 possibilities, both of which are pertinent:

a) to restrict Communion to those whom Canon Law permits to receive it

b) to encourage people who do not wish, or who are not able to receive Communion to come up for a blessing.

With regard to (a), I suspect that any attempt to give instruction on Communion during a Mass could well prove divisive and counter productive. This is too big a subject to be dismissed with only a few words and anyone who intends to disregard church teaching is likely to do so whether or not they are reminded before Communion that they should not receive.

With regard to (b), this is an approach which places the responsibilty of whether to receive squarely on the shoulders of the communicant. The person may not have had instruction in the Church's teaching on Communion but surely Our Lord does not object to such people receiving Him in good faith.

Version 1 suggests that the only reason for not receiving communion is 'if you are not a member of the Catholic faith'. Apart from Catholics in 'irregular' situations, Anglo Catholics and others (SSPX, Old Roman Catholics, etc) consider themselves members members of the Catholic faith and would consider themselves invited to receive under this wording.

Version 2 is a bit vague - there is the comment about being "spiritually prepared", which many will not relate to the bit about Confession. In any event, if my parish is anything to go by, probably the majority of those who receive on a Sunday don't go to Confession.

Version 3 is a bit divisive and also a little misleading. Surely the reason that we ban non catholics from receiving Communion is not that there are different beliefs about Communion but that, according to Canon Law, only those in full communion with the Church, and who are not in a state of grave sin, may receive Communion?

A priest whom I respect uses something like the following "if you are not receiving Communion today you are very welcome to come up for a blessing, just fold your arms across your chest and the minister will give you a blessing".

[markyboy]

My PP uses words along the lines of 'Mindful that there may be some here today unable, for whatever reason, to receive communion, there is always an invitation to come forward and receive a blessing from the minister.' He doesn't say this at every Mass, but he always does so at Requiems.

[John Ainslie]

I would go for option 1, with the single change of 'Catholic Church' for 'Catholic faith'. As JW points out, 'Catholic faith' would appear to embrace Anglo-Catholics, SSPX, etc.

IMHO, the other options are too 'preachy', and would be intrusive if - as intended - the instruction is given immediately before the distribution of Communion. The fewer words, the better.

[alan29]

Our PP uses something like the first one, but he begins "If for any reason you are unable to ..........."
I guess he is being mindful of Catholics in uncanonical matrimonial situations.

[mcb]

I wonder about the timing of the announcement? It's in the wrong place as far as the Communion chant/song is concerned, since this should begin as the priest receives, and it has the effect of reinforcing the notion that the priest's Communion is a different event from that of the rest of the people. When might a better time be?

[John Ainslie]

After the 'Lord, I am not worthy' - or perhaps, given what is being said - before it?

[FrGareth]

What is one seeking to achieve with the invitation to a blessing (as opposed to saying nothing)? I can think of 2 possibilities, both of which are pertinent: a) to restrict Communion to those whom Canon Law permits to receive it... b) to encourage people who do not wish, or who are not able to receive Communion to come up for a blessing.

Thank you all for responses so far, which highlight the difficulty of saying anything at all which is accurate without giving a long thesis on intercommunion and valid reception of the sacraments.

JW's analysis above is valid, though in my mind my motives are:

1. To give a clear instruction to those unfamiliar with Catholic worship and therefore uncertain what to do at communion time, for their comfort (but the challenge is phrasing "no you can't have it!" in a welcoming way);
2. To guard the Blessed Sacrament against unworthy reception, though I recognise that the onus is on the one receiving to receive worthily (I Cor 11:29);
3. If possible and appropriate, to remind lapsed Catholics who are present that God's desire is for them to be restored to communion through confession.

Any further thoughts?

[quaeritor]

Any further thoughts?

Just two, Fr Gareth - not well argued, I'll admit, but deeply felt nonetheless.

1. Why do we engage in this charade at all? When my wife and I married (in 1976, those heady days of Ecumenism, when we were optimistic enough to believe that all this nonsense was close to being put behind us - or naive enough to believe that we really meant all those affirmations of intent) she duly went through all the required procedures and to her lasting credit continued to take our children to Sunday Mass even on the occasions when I was away on business trips, to be rewarded by the weekly humiliation of having to remain in pew while they and I went to Communion. (Go on, O ye righteous, you tell me what answer to give to three bright primary school kids who have celebrated their First Holy Communion with due solemnity and had impressed upon them what a great and wondrous thing that is when they ask: "Why can't mummy go to Communion?") Later, when the practice of inviting "those who are unable to receive Communion" (aka "those whom we won't allow to receive Communion") to come forward to receive a blessing came in she was offered the opportunity to go and be blessed by one of her younger daughter's recent classmates. We really do know how to make our separated brethren feel welcome!

2. Just who is harmed if a technically unqualifed person, not with any ill intent, receives the Body and Blood of Our Lord? - Our Lord himself? - the recipient? - others in the queue? (There'll be some supplimentaries if the answers do not seem well thought through!)

Just seeking - as ever.

Q

[Nick Baty]

Well, I doubt that Our Lord will be harmed – I suspect God is big enough to cope.

[FrGareth]

Well, I doubt that Our Lord will be harmed – I suspect God is big enough to cope.

Indeed... it was the Lord's will to become vulnerable. When he commanded us to "Do this" he well knew that, despite our best efforts, crumbs would sometimes be scattered and chalices would occasionally spill.

If we put special procedures in place, it is not to protect God from damage (that's impossible!) but as a sign of our proper respect for the Almighty.

The current GIRM specifically rules out extraordinary ministers from purifying vessels. I interpret this as part of an effort to create a consistent culture of respect where every member of the congregation acknowledges and understands that handling or receiving the Blessed Sacrament is not something we should do lightly. (Nor should we go to the Jansenist extreme of refusing to receive because we are too sinful!)

The Blessed Sacrament is God's holiest gift to us. We receive it - when we believe it is truly Christ and have confessed all serious sin - because the Lord commanded us to. We handle it inasmuch as it is necessary to do so in order that all may receive with dignity. Whether restricting the purification to clergy effectively communicates something of the sacrament's holiness or merely satisfies the tidy mind of a rubric-writer in Rome, I find hard to judge. But I know the culture of holiness becomes more effective if many people buy into it and support it through their words and actions.

As for Q's question about why bother at all, it is a good one. Given that ecumenism has led to prayer, but not communion, in common, which is the more hospitable act towards separated brethren/sistren - to invite them to a blessing which emphasises separation, or not to draw attention to it at all? Views welcome.

[JW]

As for Q's question about why bother at all, it is a good one. Given that ecumenism has led to prayer, but not communion, in common, which is the more hospitable act towards separated brethren/sistren - to invite them to a blessing which emphasises separation, or not to draw attention to it at all? Views welcome.

Well, I think that this needs to be viewed in the light of the current Pope's opinion that priests and parishes must work hard to help the divorced and remarried to feel that they are not 'excluded' even though they cannot received absolution or the Eucharist (see p. 29 of this week's Tablet). So the 'powers that be' don't accept that exclusion from the Eucharist need necessarily emphasise separation. (I'm afraid I can't agree with that opinion).

Perhaps, instead of reminding people of the situation after the Priest's communion, a notice could be printed in the Funeral/Marriage/Ordination booklet: "...If you are not receiving Communion..."

[londonchurchman]

As for Q's question about why bother at all, it is a good one. Given that ecumenism has led to prayer, but not communion, in common, which is the more hospitable act towards separated brethren/sistren - to invite them to a blessing which emphasises separation, or not to draw attention to it at all? Views welcome.

On the latter point, the feedback I have had when non-Catholic friends have attended Mass with me is that most of them truly appreciate the opportunity of going up for a blessing and see it as a gesture of friendliness and warmth, and like the specific interaction with the Priest. They don't always avail themselves of it, but like the option - it's even more special when a specific invitation is made to come up.