Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Blessings at Holy Communion
ROME, APRIL 21, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Several readers commented on the question of blessings at Communion (see March 24) after we presented a letter from the Holy See expressing a fairly negative assessment of this practice.
Our readers expressed opinions both in favor and against, often outlining situations that the practice would promote or hinder.
One reader, for example, commented on the value of Mass in itself: "I have read St. Leonard's [of Port Maurice, 1676-1751] 'The Hidden Treasure' and was deeply moved at his writing about the miracle and the power of the Mass. Everyone in this world should be invited to attend Holy Mass no matter what religion or in what state of grace they find themselves. Especially fallen away Catholics who might be divorced and remarried (but they really are not married in the eyes of the Catholic Church) or Catholics who are in the state of mortal sin due to addictions of one sort or another. They try to amend their lives but fall too often, and they must sit in their pews while 'everyone' else gets up into the procession line. This is an embarrassing situation to one who is guilty of mortal sin ... [but being unable to go to confession] would not dare to compound their sins by sins by the sacrilege of receiving the holy Eucharist.
"So, if they were allowed to join the procession to receive a blessing 'by the priest or deacon' they would not stand out as one who is in a state of mortal sin. For that is the only reason they would not receive, being that the fasting rule of one hour is almost impossible to break.
"I have come to the conclusion that many Catholics just stop going to Mass for this reason.
"Many people need a reason for not receiving the Eucharist on a Sunday morning and at least a three-hour fast would allow some excuse. The good Catholics would have a deeper respect for just what they are doing and the sacrifice of fasting is a good way to inspire respect."
I agree with our reader that even those who are unable to receive Communion should attend Mass; indeed, they retain the same obligation to do so as all Catholics.
However, I would point out that St. Leonard's work was written at a time when the practice of frequent and daily Communion was quite rare, even among vowed religious and pious Catholics. Therefore it cannot be supposed that the object of his work was particularly aimed at those unable to receive Communion.
Indeed, for those in such a situation the principal grace of the Mass would be that of conversion: that is, finding the strength to remove the obstacles to their being able to approach the altar and receive the bread of life. This is true both of those who are afflicted by sin as well as those, such as a non-Catholic attending Mass with a spouse, who cannot receive Communion for other reasons.
In some cases a blessing might help such people attend Mass by avoiding an embarrassing moment. But it could also have exactly the opposite effect by singling them out for a blessing when others receive Communion. Likewise, this situation is more often that not provoked by the bad habit in many parishes of insisting on an orderly pew-by-pew communion procession when a bit of confusion would be enough to help such people pass unnoticed.
In other cases, human frailty being what it is, the possibility of receiving a blessing in lieu of Communion might actually satisfy some people so that they never actually take the plunge of regularizing their situation before God and the Church.
All in all, anecdotal evidence could probably be presented for all sides, and the question should eventually be decided by Church authorities on the basis of solid theological arguments.
There are good arguments for restoring the three-hour fast, and our reader gives some of them. Some bishops proposed this a few years ago while others objected that it would make some successful pastoral initiatives, such as lunch-hour Masses in urban centers, almost impossible.
Another reader, a priest, asked, "What if a person coming for a blessing during Communion time is living in sin and a person who knows that person and sees that person thinks that the person is about to receive Communion? Since the communicant's back is to the people in the pews, could not this situation be a source of scandal?"
I would say that if the possibility of receiving a blessing is a known option, then a person who is unable to see whether or not someone has communicated should in all charity grant them the benefit of the doubt and not cede to the temptations of rash judgment.
Even if such a person believed that the other had received Communion, then, once more in charity, they should rejoice that the sinner has found a way to make his peace with God and is now able to approach the altar rail.
Except in cases of notorious public sins, the nature of which require some form of public reconciliation, we should respect the other's conscience and refrain from making judgments as to the state of their souls. It is true that pastoral practice usually advises some people who have been reconciled to attend Mass where they are unknown so as to avoid rash judgments. But even if this advice is not followed, then our tendency should always be toward charitable thoughts.
Several readers commented on the question of blessings at Communion (see March 24) after we presented a letter from the Holy See expressing a fairly negative assessment of this practice.
Our readers expressed opinions both in favor and against, often outlining situations that the practice would promote or hinder.
One reader, for example, commented on the value of Mass in itself: "I have read St. Leonard's [of Port Maurice, 1676-1751] 'The Hidden Treasure' and was deeply moved at his writing about the miracle and the power of the Mass. Everyone in this world should be invited to attend Holy Mass no matter what religion or in what state of grace they find themselves. Especially fallen away Catholics who might be divorced and remarried (but they really are not married in the eyes of the Catholic Church) or Catholics who are in the state of mortal sin due to addictions of one sort or another. They try to amend their lives but fall too often, and they must sit in their pews while 'everyone' else gets up into the procession line. This is an embarrassing situation to one who is guilty of mortal sin ... [but being unable to go to confession] would not dare to compound their sins by sins by the sacrilege of receiving the holy Eucharist.
"So, if they were allowed to join the procession to receive a blessing 'by the priest or deacon' they would not stand out as one who is in a state of mortal sin. For that is the only reason they would not receive, being that the fasting rule of one hour is almost impossible to break.
"I have come to the conclusion that many Catholics just stop going to Mass for this reason.
"Many people need a reason for not receiving the Eucharist on a Sunday morning and at least a three-hour fast would allow some excuse. The good Catholics would have a deeper respect for just what they are doing and the sacrifice of fasting is a good way to inspire respect."
I agree with our reader that even those who are unable to receive Communion should attend Mass; indeed, they retain the same obligation to do so as all Catholics.
However, I would point out that St. Leonard's work was written at a time when the practice of frequent and daily Communion was quite rare, even among vowed religious and pious Catholics. Therefore it cannot be supposed that the object of his work was particularly aimed at those unable to receive Communion.
Indeed, for those in such a situation the principal grace of the Mass would be that of conversion: that is, finding the strength to remove the obstacles to their being able to approach the altar and receive the bread of life. This is true both of those who are afflicted by sin as well as those, such as a non-Catholic attending Mass with a spouse, who cannot receive Communion for other reasons.
In some cases a blessing might help such people attend Mass by avoiding an embarrassing moment. But it could also have exactly the opposite effect by singling them out for a blessing when others receive Communion. Likewise, this situation is more often that not provoked by the bad habit in many parishes of insisting on an orderly pew-by-pew communion procession when a bit of confusion would be enough to help such people pass unnoticed.
In other cases, human frailty being what it is, the possibility of receiving a blessing in lieu of Communion might actually satisfy some people so that they never actually take the plunge of regularizing their situation before God and the Church.
All in all, anecdotal evidence could probably be presented for all sides, and the question should eventually be decided by Church authorities on the basis of solid theological arguments.
There are good arguments for restoring the three-hour fast, and our reader gives some of them. Some bishops proposed this a few years ago while others objected that it would make some successful pastoral initiatives, such as lunch-hour Masses in urban centers, almost impossible.
Another reader, a priest, asked, "What if a person coming for a blessing during Communion time is living in sin and a person who knows that person and sees that person thinks that the person is about to receive Communion? Since the communicant's back is to the people in the pews, could not this situation be a source of scandal?"
I would say that if the possibility of receiving a blessing is a known option, then a person who is unable to see whether or not someone has communicated should in all charity grant them the benefit of the doubt and not cede to the temptations of rash judgment.
Even if such a person believed that the other had received Communion, then, once more in charity, they should rejoice that the sinner has found a way to make his peace with God and is now able to approach the altar rail.
Except in cases of notorious public sins, the nature of which require some form of public reconciliation, we should respect the other's conscience and refrain from making judgments as to the state of their souls. It is true that pastoral practice usually advises some people who have been reconciled to attend Mass where they are unknown so as to avoid rash judgments. But even if this advice is not followed, then our tendency should always be toward charitable thoughts.
posted by Chipi Buenafe at
5:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home