I have no intention to argue on the merits of Catholic liturgy that I have experienced it for decades. However, I would like some to better understand.
I must say that I don't understand all these personal opinions with regard to proper liturgy. This practice has been common in English speaking countries for decades. See below for several who have discussed the issue.
Blessings for Non-communicants
I also don't understand the form of argument. If there is dispute, should we not look to our bishops and to the Holy See, rather than to our own interpretation of Catholic documents?
This is the personal response of someone at the Vatican which is old, and has been supeceeded by the Vatican's direct response to an inquiry - labled Protocol No. 930/08/L.
It is a response directly from the
Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship.
In that newer post, the author of the post in the link you provided says this about his own words in that post:
A: We have addressed this topic on a couple of occasions (May 10 and 24, 2005)
in which we expressed misgivings regarding this practice. At the same time,
we pointed out that the legal situation of the usage is murky with bishops making statements falling
on both sides of the argument.
..the letter... provides some valuable pointers on the legitimacy of this practice and the mind of the Holy See regarding it.
The letter said that "this matter is presently under the attentive study of the Congregation," so "for the present, this dicastery wishes to limit itself to the following observations":
"1.
The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.
"2.
Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf.
Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; Canon 1169, § 2; and Roman
Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).
"3. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands
which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here
by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception,
is to be explicitly discouraged.
"4. The Apostolic Exhortation
Familiaris Consortio n. 84,
'forbids any pastor, for whatever reason or pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry'. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.
"5. In a similar way,
for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church's discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin)."
Blessings at Holy Communion
This goes back to the issue of obedience:
"in accord with the norm of law" those who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion "should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing"
Again, they should not even APPROACH Holy Communion and neither should they receive a blessing.
We are bound in obedience to the Church and Her Laws. This is from the Vatican.
Those who advocate going forward for a blessing in the communion line advocate that those who are not to receive Holy Commuion do exactly what the Vatican says the law of the Church forbids, and so they advocate disobedience to the Church in fact if not in intention.
If any one wants to continue to argue against this, then it is the Vatican and the Church they are arguing against, not me (as I have already said before in this thread).