Spontaneous and Ritual Blessings
Date: February 22, 2025
Author: Fr. Edward McNamara, LC
Question: I would like to ask about the difference between a spontaneous blessing and a ritual blessing. Are their effects the same or not? I see some priests blessing water without the rite; they just say their own prayers. So, is that holy water or not? In many cases I also see ministers blessing without the ceremony (that is, they gave spontaneous blessings). This makes me confused. Also, is the sign of the cross given by priests necessary when they bless religious articles such as statues, images, medals and rosaries? If a priest blesses something without giving the sign of the cross by his hand, will the blessing be valid? — P.N.V., Manila, Philippines
Answer: Our reader is asking as to the difference between a blessing, imparted by a priest or deacon, which follows the rites described in the official Book of Blessings, and those imparted by the same ministers using other words and gestures, what he calls “spontaneous blessings.”
This reply does not address the status of “non-liturgical blessings” mentioned in a document of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith for specific situations.
Any blessing, of the many hundreds of blessings, found in the Book of Blessings, is a liturgical blessing whenever it is used.
This is certainly true of all blessings imparted by priests and deacons. It is also true, however, of all those blessings which may be invoked by laity in conformity to the norms found in the Book of Blessings itself.
Since, in accordance with the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, the capacity to act liturgically is rooted in baptism and confirmation and not limited to the ordained, the laity may also call down or invoke God’s blessing on people and some objects.
Blessings which in some way change the spiritual status of a person or object, often called constitutive blessings, such as institution into a ministry or the blessing of a chalice or objects of devotion such as holy water or a rosary, are reserved to specific ordained ministers. For example, a rosary may be blessed by any ordained minister, a chalice by a priest or bishop, whereas the consecration of a church and altar is reserved to the bishop.
With respect to the so-called spontaneous blessings which can occur whenever a priest or deacon is asked to bless a person or object in circumstances where the official book is unavailable, he may impart this blessing using the traditional gestures and a formula composed on the spot that is in harmony with the official texts.
This blessing will be no less liturgical than that which follows the book. Once more the doctrine of Vatican II, and subsequent practice, allows for situations, such as a community celebration of the Word of God, in which an authentic liturgical act can take place even though it does not follow any detailed official ritual but rather an approved outline.
Indeed, the Book of Blessings itself foresees the possibility of these brief unforeseen blessings in offering some generic formulae adaptable for many pastoral motivations.
For this reason, we could say that, in the case of these simple blessings of persons or objects, the minister’s intention to bless, and the words and gestures in harmony with the ritual books, would be sufficient for the blessing to be a liturgical act.
For the more solemn constitutive blessings, however, such as the blessing of objects used in a liturgical context, quick spontaneous formulae should not be used.
Hence, while it is probably possible to bless water in a simple manner, I do not think it is pastorally advisable either for the faithful or for the minister. In such cases it is better to use the extensive formula found in the liturgical books which brings out the significance of the blessing as a reminder of baptism, of the Trinity and of the Redemption.
Regarding the second question as to making the sign of the cross while imparting blessings:
The Book of Blessings does not say when a sign of the cross is to be made while imparting a blessing. It usually describes the minister extending the hand or hands in a gesture of blessing while reciting the formula of blessing. While this is more than sufficient, because the blessing consists above all in the prayer, it often led the faithful to believe that no blessing had taken place as they expected the sign of the cross.
To remedy this confusion, Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez, the then prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, issued a decree in September 2002 that clarified the issue. To wit:
“A DECREE FOR THE CITY AND THE WORLD
“On always making use of the sign of the holy Cross in blessings
“Since, from the established usage, the liturgical custom has always been in force that in the rites of blessing the sign of the cross is employed by the celebrant tracing it with the right hand over the persons or things for whom mercy is implored, this Congregation for divine worship and the discipline of the sacraments, in order to dispel any doubts, has established that, even if the text of the part of the Roman ritual entitled ‘The Book of Blessings’ remains silent about the sign itself or lacks an express mention of the appropriate time for this action, nevertheless the sacred ministers should adopt the aforementioned sign of the cross as necessary when carrying out any blessing.
“Without a mention, however, the appropriate time should be regarded as when the text of the blessing uses the words blessing, to bless, or similar or, lacking these words, when the prayer of blessing itself is concluded.
“Anything to the contrary notwithstanding.
“From the office of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, on 14 September 2002, the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.
“Jorge A. card. MEDINA ESTEVEZ, Prefect. ✠ Francesco Pio Tamburrino, archbishop Secretary”
This decree, which unfortunately is not widely known, clarifies the gesture from a pastoral point of view and indicates a clear preference for always making a sign of the cross.
The authority attached to a simple decree is not sufficient to undermine the validity of a blessing given by a priest or deacon who follows the rites as described in the Book of Blessings or who simply intends to bless with a spontaneous formula while omitting the sign of the cross.
* * *
Readers may send questions to zenit.liturgy@gmail.com. Please put the word "Liturgy" in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.