www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Those Who May Bless

On another thread we were discussing who may impart blessings. In the Byzantine tradition, it is proper only for the priest (and not a deacon) to bless.

In the Latin Church, it is proper for both priests and deacons to bless. For example, the deacon as the official representative of the Church blesses the couple at a wedding outside of Mass (in the Latin tradition the couple minister the Sacrament of Marriage to each other). Or the deacon (as the minister of the sacrament) may bless a child at a Baptism outside of Mass.

Some thoughts: It seems to me that a priest's blessings are valued and sought after more in the Byzantine tradition, no? In the Latin church, one most often sees a priest giving a blessing in the context of a liturgical or para-liturgical event, but one rarely sees people approaching a priest for a blessing ("Father, bless"). Even when it comes to blessing religious objects (medals, rosaries, etc.), I've heard lay people express, "Oh, I hear that we can just bless them ourselves, now" (i.e., don't need a priest). Perhaps this has something to do with the priest shortage?

Comments?
Martin

P.S.: There also seems to be more respect afforded to deacons in the Byzantine tradition (e.g., "Father Deacon"), even if they may not bless....

Dear-in-Christ Martin,

Bishops bless as well.

Tony

Well, yes, as well as abbots and abbesses.

Anyone I've left out?

I've always wondered how abbesses bless...I actually think we had a discussion about it on the Forum a couple of years ago.

Miserere Mei Deus,

I don't think it's fair to say that deacons are accorded more respect in the Byzantine tradition than in the Latin tradition, as if the amount of respect given is intrinsically related to the tradition itself.

I do think it entirely appropriate, however, to posit that all clergy and religious persons in the Byzantine tradition are nowadays much more revered than those in the Roman Catholic Church. To put it simply, most modern-day Roman Catholics are "affected," for lack of a better word.

Just my humble opinion, however.

Logos Teen

Martin,

I'm not sure that it would be accurate to state that the Latin deacon "blesses" a marriage. As you said the spouses are the ministers of the Sacrament of Matrimony in accordance with Latin sacramental theology. The bishop, priest, or deacon validly assist at the celebration of the Sacrament of Matrimony, which is to say, that those who assist ask the contracting parties to manifest their consent and in the name of the Church receive that consent (cf. CIC, c. 1108). So in Latin sacramental theology no blessing is given. The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes this distinction:

Interestingly if there are no ordained ministers available (bishop, priest, deacon) the Latin Ordinary may delegate lay persons to assist, i.e, receive the matrimonial consent on behalf of the Church, at marriages (cf CIC, c. 1112).
Taken with the comment from the CCC, this would, at the very least, infer that no blessing is needed in the Latin celebration of marriage.

IMHO, the honorific or customary title of "Father Deacon" is accorded to deacons in the Eastern Church in view of the spiritual counsel or spiritual direction they may impart.

John, who is indeed a Father and a Deacon of the Byzantine Catholic Church, and limits his blessings to his children.

Is it acceptable for a layperson to include a benediction at the conclusion of their email? I know of someone who ends every email with the "May the Lord bless you and keep you, may he make his face shine upon you and be gracious to you, may he lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace" benediction. I've wondered if I should mention to her that giving a blessing like this really belongs to the realm of the priesthood.

Tammy

Fr. Deacon John,

Thanks for the clarification.

In the Latin tradition, I think either the priest or the deacon does indeed give a blessing to the couple during the wedding ceremony, but, as you indicated, this blessing is not essential for the validity of the sacrament as is the blessing from the priest or bishop in the Byzantine tradition.

I did not know that "if there are no ordained ministers available (bishop, priest, deacon) the Latin Ordinary may delegate lay persons to assist, i.e, receive the matrimonial consent on behalf of the Church, at marriages (cf CIC, c. 1112)." That truly is interesting, and does indeed underscore that the blessing is not required.

Martin

There are also customs of blessings outside the church itself. For example, a father or mother sometimes imparts a blessing to their children or grandchildren in a family setting. Christmas especially.

I once knew an OCA choir director who recalls being embarrassed as a teenager as she was about to leave on a trip by car. Her mother came out of the house with holy water and blessed the car for a safe journey. Would that life were more like that nowadays.

Tammy- There is nothing wrong with your friend's blessing. Don't you say "God bless you" if someone sneezes, and on many other occasions? I bless my children every night when I tuck them in. These are blessings proper to the laity. Clerical blessings are a different thing. If your friend was blessing groups of people "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" that would be wrong [though I think that is okay in a one-on-one parental blessing].

Deacons and laypeople can impart blessings over things like food, etc, by putting their fingers together as if to make the sign of the cross and tracing the cross with their fingers over the item to be blessed. They do not say any priestly benediction though.

Anastasios

But I suppose the difference between priestly blessings and the blessings of laypeople is that the blessings of laypeople only ask God to bless the item or person, whereas the priestly blessing actually commands it, as part of priestly powers?

Is this correct?

Logos Teen

Garrett,

How about the priestly blessing actually "imparts" it (the blessing)? I have doubts about the wisdom of folks - even priests - "commanding" God to do things .

Many years,

Neil

It is my understanding that among Orthodox the custom of making the sign of the cross with the first three fingers (as if to bless oneself) is accepted. What is not accepted is for those who are not priests of bishops to bless with the hand forming the Christogram. That is what was told to me, it may be a local custom I think this is what Anastasios is saying above.

Dear Friends,

Just my two cents' worth!

The Old Believers accept ONLY the two fingers for blessing by anyone as they believe that since only Christ died on the Cross, only the two fingers representing Christ may be used when tracing the Sign of the Cross over anything.

The three fingers can be used by any other when blessing anything, including our bed at night before we retire.

Abbesses may bless others in this way as well.

One formula I read about and personally use is:

"This (name the object) is being blessed by the Sign of the Holy Cross, + in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen."

I recently had personal experience of the power of the Cross blessing, even when done by sinful laity, like me . . .

We had what appears to have been a poltergeist in our new home that knocked furiously throughout the night, in series of ten knocks.

My wife and I were both quite upset by the whole thing, after I determined that this was not being done by a prankster and the noise was coming from within the house.

My wife told me not to wait for a priest, but to bless the doorposts and house myself with holy water.

I did so using the Holy Water that Anhelyna had so kindly sent me from Lourdes.

The very next night, there was no knocking and none ever since (we had the house blessed later by a priest as well).

Also, the Sign of the Cross can expel temptations in oneself. And one should bless the places frequented by people in trouble or suffering as this is a great aid as well.

The medal of St Benedict and the Cross of St Benedict are powerful sacramentals as well.

"Crux Sacra sit mihi Lux! Nunquam draco sit mihi dux!" (May the Holy Cross be my Light. May the dragon never be my guide!)

Alex

Hi, folks,

Before the discussion some misinterpretations of the blessing as such should have been clarified.

From the theological perspective when an Eastern priest �blesses� somebody it is nothing but a radically abridged divine service. You can compare it with the beginning of a liturgy when the priest (or bishop) is invited by a deacon �to bless�, that is to start the ceremony (�Blagoslovi, Vladyko�). The former answers �Blessed is�� etc. It is crucial to note that it is actually God or His Kingdom that is actually �Blessed�, but not the congregation. The latter simply receives �peace� from the Lord when the priest or bishop makes the sign of the Cross over it. At the end of the liturgy people confirm the prayer by �Amen�.

The same is true when a parishioner asks for a blessing personally. He/she invites a priest �to bless�, the latter answers �Blessed is�� or �In the name of the Father�� that is, in other words, he begins a small ceremony and gives �peace� to the person who ends it with �Amen�. So it is nothing but a private divine service and it is God again but not the person who is �Blessed�.

Therefore, that who is allowed to perform the Sacrament is the only (neither a deacon nor an abbess) to be allowed to give so called �blessings�. However, laymen may perform some services when there is no ordained priest. In this case they have to leave out the liturgical parts that are reserved for him only. So they also may �bless� or make the sign of the Cross over their �beloved neighbors�, but not in the priest manner.

Valerius