Jmj
Good day, friends.

In another recent thread (named "Married 4 Times"), a first-time forum-visitor left a message that contained the following statement:

"... I am 58, was recently in the hospital and Annointed by Women from a Catholic Church ..."
This was just something said in passing, since the main thrust of her message was about getting out of the "irregular marriage" situation that she is now in.

I couldn't help noticing the visitor's statement about "anointing" by some Catholic women, and it troubled me because I vaguely recalled reading that such a thing is not permitted. I decided to look into it and to start this new thread, rather than burden the visitor on the other thread, who may not even be Catholic. In replying to her about the marital matters, I only added this postscript:
"PS: Whatever that 'anointing' you received was, it was not the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick (formerly called Extreme Unction), which can be administered only by a priest or bishop."

[to be continued]

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 30, 2002

Answers

[continued from above]

Today I found what I had vaguely recalled while reading that other thread. It is a pair of passages from the 1997 "Instruction on Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful in the Sacred Ministry of the Priest." This document was approved by the pope and was signed (in a very extraordinary way) by seven heads of Vatican curial offices (called "dicasteries") -- the Congregation for the Clergy, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Pontifical Council of the Laity, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, etc.. These dicasteries wanted to make public the fact that, for many years, they had received a constant barrage of reports, from around the world, of improper activities by the "non-ordained faithful" -- especially related to the improper assumption of roles reserved to the clergy.

A section of the document called "Practical Provisions" is introduced by the following words: "[R]emedies, based on the normative discipline of the Church and deemed opportune to correct abuses which have been brought to the attention of our dicasteries, are hereby set forth."
Then, the "practical provisions" to "correct abuses" related to anointing are found in "Article 9," from which I have taken the following two passages:

[concluded below]

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 30, 2002.

[continued from above]

"In using sacramentals, the non-ordained faithful should ensure that these are in no way regarded as sacraments whose administration is proper and exclusive to the bishop and to the priest. Since they are not priests, in no instance may the non-ordained perform anointings either with the Oil of the Sick or ony other oil. ..."

"It must also be affirmed that the reservation of the ministry of anointing to the priest is related to the connection of [the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick] to the forgiveness of sin and the worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist. No other person may act as ordinary or extraordinary minister of the sacrament since such constitutes simulation of the sacrament."

I thought I should post this information here for all Catholics to see, so that they would not get involved in anything that is illicit, and so that they would try to persuade their friends/family to stop anointing if they have gotten involved in that kind of thing.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 30, 2002.

John, I have seen lay persons anoint at the conclusion of a regular mass at a Charismatic Center (in Houston, Texas). This was done in the following form: a congretional procession to the altar, the lay (extraordinary minister) would then annoint the person's forehead with oil in the sign of the cross and then pray with the person for whatever individual need that person might express. Is there any formal exemptions to canon form for Charismatic Center's or for special masses, i.e. at "healing masses"? Thanks and God Bless

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), December 30, 2002.

Hello, John.
I'm not aware of any "exemptions" from the document I quoted. What you describe seems to be the very kind of abuse that the Vatican wishes to stop.
However, if someone can quote from a different Vatican document that clearly allows for exceptions of the kind you have mentioned, I will withdraw what I said.
I am certainly not against prayer for healing, wherever it may be done, but prayer can be done without anointing. Also, I recall posting at the forum an statement that forbids the laity to bless persons with the sign of the cross within a liturgical or para-liturgical action -- because of the potential of confusion of roles and powers between the ordained and non-ordained. (I mention this because you referred to an anointing of the forehead with oil, in the sign of the cross, at a Mass.)
God bless you. John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 30, 2002.

HI John, good point! Being involved in healing services, we've been involved and aware of this problem. It's a shame there's been confusion, and we've heard of cases where people, usually the non- catechized, have mistaken healing prayer for the sacrament of Extreme Unction. So wisely, the Church had to make clarifications to protect us from abuses.

I have a great document in front of me called "Instruction on prayers for Healing", from the 'congregation of the doctrine of faith'in Rome, Cardinal Ratzinger,prefect, dated September 14, 2000, the Feast of the Triumph of the Cross.

It has good teaching on 'the meaning and value of sickness and healing in the economy of salvation', the 'desire for healing and the prayer to obtain it', 'charism of healing', etc. Try and get your hands on it.

In section ll., Disciplinary Norms, article 4, 'Bishop has the right to issue norms for his particular Church..."

We are careful and don't used blest oil in large groups, but I have some in my purse and we bless my family and loved ones with it. Our associate pastor, a holy orthodox priest, blesses it for us. Theresa

-- Theresa Huether (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), December 30, 2002.

Thank you, Theresa.

I was able to find the document you mentioned, so I will link it for you and everyone else.

I have to say that, in light of (1) what I quoted above from 1997 and (2) there being no exceptions mentioned in the CDF instruction from 2000, I couldn't feel comfortable with any use of blessed oil by a non-ordained person, not even in the home with his/her family.

Though I could be overlooking something, what I think I see is that all Catholic use of blessed oil is to be done only by the ordained, based on what we see priests doing in the Epistle of St. James. I'm not aware of there being any descriptions of the use of blessed oil by the laity within scripture or Apostolic Tradition. If I am right about this, then the priest you mentioned is just not aware of this and is making an honest mistake.

You mentioned that the CDF Instruction gives each bishop the duty to establish norms for his diocese. But I saw in the Instruction that those norms pertain only to liturgical services of healing (which, of course, would involve an ordained man). The Instruction doesn't state that a bishop can make norms for anointing by the non-ordained within a liturgy or outside it.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 30, 2002.

Oh, Theresa! I just remembered the case of Blessed (Brother) Andre Bessette -- a non-ordained Canadian man who used oil for healing, and without being prevented by the Church. He was a holy man of the not-distant past (died 1937) whose brief biography should be familiar to every Catholic, I think. I had the privilege of seeing his burial place in Montreal a couple of years ago.

Now it still may be true that a discipline was really imposed on all the laity in 1997 (so that none of us may use oil), but the life of Bl. Andre would appear to indicate that the discipline could some day be lifted.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 30, 2002.

John,

It's funny that you mention Brother Andre, as my mother has recently discovered that we are related to him through her family, the Bassett's (someone changed the spelling upon their arrival in Massachusetts). But I believe Brother Andre, from the information my mother has gathered, was ordained. One of the websites that has information on him contains this paragraph: Andre was the eighth child in a family of 12 and at baptism he was given the name Alfred. Orphaned at the age of 12, he tried his hand at various trades but was not successful in any of them. He could barely read and write and was sickly most of his life. At the age of 15 he became a Brother of Holy Cross but was rejected at the end of the novitiate. At the insistence of the bishop of Montreal, however, Brother Andre was allowed to make religious profession. For forty years he worked as porter at the College of Notre Dame, until he was needed full time at the shrine of St. Joseph. People from all over Canada came to him for cures or for spiritual direction. The Oratory that he built in honor of St. Joseph was solemnly dedicated in 1955 and raised to the rank of a minor basilica.

If someone could teach me how to post a link on this site, I could show you where I got my information. Please correct me if I am wrong, I am assuming since he was allowed to take his vows, this means he was ordained.

Amy

-- Amy (amy20013@hotmail.com), December 31, 2002.

Hello, Amy.
Thanks for your message. I think that it's really neat that you are related to Blessed Andre! You have a very close intercessor in heaven, for sure.

You wrote: "I am assuming since he was allowed to take his vows, this means he was ordained."
I'm afraid that your assumption is not right. I noticed that you referred to your relative as "Brother" Andre. That was right, because he was a Holy Cross Brother. "Brothers" and "Sisters" in religious orders and congregations do take vows, but without being ordained as priests.

To make a link, you have to use a precise HTML (hyper-text mark-up language) command. I am going to try a little experiment here, to see if I can get it to come out exactly the way it is supposed to. If it doesn't work, I'll do it a different way in a follow-up message:

%lt a href="http://www.blah-blah-blah.com"%gt Your name for the link %lt/a%gt

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 31, 2002.

As I feared, it didn't work. I wish I had made a better "mental note" of how to reproduce the command. Well, I know that I can get around the problem. To make a link, use the following model, but remove the eight apostrophes (') surrounding the greater-than and less-than signs (">" and "<"):

'<'a href="http://www.blah-blah-blah.com"'>' Your name for the link '<'/a'>'

If that doesn't work, I have a final method that I know will not fail.

JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 31, 2002.

Good. It worked. I suggest that you use select/copy/paste to lift that "template" and put it somewhere (a place you won't forget) for your future use. Before you save it, remove the eight apostrophes, but don't remove the two quotation marks surrounding the sample URL, because those are required. Where the template says, "Your name for the link," you should insert whatever you want the reader to click on.
Please give it a try now.
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 31, 2002.

Interesting thread. I wonder if someone has a source of information on who may give blessings; i.e., bless people & things. I'm sure at least some of us have witnessed misuses of blessings. I recall at my cousin's wedding a little more than a year ago, the congregation was asked to raise their hands & "bless" the couple. I also recall a service in my old parish wherein parents "blessed" their children w/ holy water. I'd be interested on hearing some opinions on where the lines ar drawn. As I understand it, laypeople have no power to give a blessing; only to ask God's blessing.

-- jake (jake1@pngusa.net), December 31, 2002.

Dear Jake,

"Giving a blessing" means invoking God's blessing, whether it is done by a clergyman or a lay/religious person. A priest does not have the innate power to confer blessings per se, but only to invoke them on behalf of another. Parents should certainly bless their children, and using holy water is an appropriate, though not essential, way of doing so. However, lay/religious persons are not allowed to give blessings within the context of the liturgy, since such action would blur the distinction between the ordained clergy and the lay/religious congregation . The most common scenario in which this rule is violated is during the distribution of the Eucharist by lay/religious extraordinary ministers. In our church and many others, those in the congregation who for whatever reason cannot receive the Eucharist are still allowed to come up at Communion time to receive a blessing. Such folks may include young children, those in RCIA who have not yet been received into the Church, those who are not in the proper state of grace to receive, those who may have broken the required fast, etc. Such people assume a specific posture which signals that they are not receiving Communion, but only a blessing. Such people should always approach a priest or deacon, not a lay/religious minister. Doing the latter places the extraordinary minister in the uncomfortable position of choosing between doing something he/she is not authorized to do, or refusing to give the person a blessing.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 31, 2002.

Jmj

Hello, Paul.
The practice you describe (people approaching for a blessing when unable to receive Communion) was discussed at the forum earlier in the year, but I have been unable to find the old thread to link it for you.

The points you have mentioned just now came up in that discussion (particularly that the blessing ought to be done only by an ordained man), but I remember that one of the last subjects raised called into question the whole practice. In other words, in days to come, this blessing may be stopped by the Vatican. If it happens, it would be one or both of two reasons:
(1) the problem of people approaching the non-ordained -- and the confusion/interruption/etc. that this can cause ...
(2) the fact that such a blessing is not called for in the G.I.R.M. or rubrics -- and is thus an illicit "accretion" to the order of the Mass.
We shall see. Perhaps the bishops will discuss this at one of their Conference meetings some day.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 31, 2002.

Jmj

Hello again, John Placette.
Earlier on this thread I mentioned the following to you:

"I recall posting at the forum an statement that forbids the laity to bless persons with the sign of the cross within a liturgical or para-liturgical action -- because of the potential of confusion of roles and powers between the ordained and non-ordained. (I mention this because you referred to an anointing of the forehead with oil, in the sign of the cross, at a Mass.)"

On second thought today, I have to withdraw this partially. Although the non-ordained cannot bless the congregation nor use blessed oil, it is not forbidden, in a special case, for a layman to make the sign of the cross on another person in church. I am thinking of the imposition of ashes on Ash Wednesday. When a priest needs help, he can ask a layman to join him in imposing ashes, in the form of a cross, on peoples' foreheads, while speaking the required words (which are not words of "blessing").

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 31, 2002.

The scriptures proclaim "blessing the Lord with all my soul" in the psalms! We are to speak blessings, we are to be blessings, we are to bless! One thing this year I have learned real good, what we say has so much power. Do we speak blessings or curses?

Society has so many cliches and so many 'jokes'. "I was just joking..", they say, are we aware how much we either bless or curse one another, truly our words have power.

This is not the same blessing as the priest gives in his ministerial anointing, but yes, bless your children, bless your spouse.

Bless you Lord, oh my soul!!! Theres

-- Theresa Huether (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), December 31, 2002.

One specific situation where a lay person licitly participates in conferring a blessing during the liturgy is at the Rite of Acceptance of the RCIA program. This is the first of several short ceremonies for persons receiving instruction prior to entering the Church. These Rites take place during the Mass, immediately after the homily, and are directed by the priest. Part of the Rite of Acceptance calls for the candidate's sponsor (usually a lay person) to make the sign of the cross on the candidate's forehead, ears, eyes, lips, heart, hands, and feet, as the priest reads the relevant invocations. However, in this situation, the context is clear to all present, and there is little chance of confusion over clerical vs. lay roles.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 01, 2003.