Afraid of appearing too pious ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter marthaferretti
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am amazed that you drew the conclusion that you did from the Bishops’ statement.
Why is that? The text clearly states that one may receive in the hand or on the tongue. That is, the “norm” is either hand or tongue.

That is not the same as the “norm” is hand.

And it also does not contradict the fact that the universal law is reception on the tongue, with an indult to receive on the hand.
 
Morning All,

Wow. I was riveted to my chair when I read this as it has much to do with this topic. Hats off to the Vatican for the courageous Cardinal who did something about it.

marysanawim.wordpress.com/2009/03/16/vatican-newspaper-article-says-catholics-should-receive-communion-kneeling-and-on-the-tongue/

Below, I have copied the relevant parts that I wanted to emphasise. I know that this is somewhat old, being 2 years and all.

"In the United States for instance, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Committee on the Liturgy wrote in its July 2002 newsletter: “Kneeling is not a licit posture for receiving Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States of America unless the bishop of a particular diocese has derogated from this norm in an individual and extraordinary circumstance.”

The majority of the faithful have since adopted the practice of standing and receiving communion on the hand.

However, some traditional Catholics, often derisively referred to as “pre-Vatican II” Catholics have held to the practice of communion kneeling and on the tongue. Those same Catholics are often the most vociferous defenders of life and family within and without the Church.

While many valiant Catholic activists who work in the pro-life and pro-family battles receive communion in the common fashion, they nonetheless respect the right of those who wish to receive communion kneeling and on the tongue.

Not so for those within the Church seeking to get the Church in line with the times.
Certain Church leaders, priests and even bishops who are zealous in their attempts to modernize the Church have gone so far as to attempt to enforce modernism by refusing communion to those who kneel for communion.

One prominent example of such was Orange County Florida Bishop Tod Brown who was caught on video last year refusing communion to a woman who was kneeling. Brown is also known for refusing in 1994 to back an Idaho measure to deny homosexuals special privileges. Explaining his actions he said the law “would contribute to attitudes of intolerance and hostility in Idaho directed at homosexual citizens and is potentially discriminatory.”

In Brown’s diocese there has been considerable intolerance toward Catholics who kneel for communion and some traditional Catholics have been asked to leave the diocese.

These types of situations caused the Vatican to react rather strongly in 2002. Jorge A. Cardinal Medina Estévez, the head of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, which addresses liturgical matters, wrote a bishop about reports received of a priest denying communion to faithful because they were kneeling.
The Cardinal called such denial “a grave violation of one of the most basic rights of the Christian faithful,” and directed the bishop to investigate the case. The letter said that the Vatican regards such abuses of the faithful as very grave. The letter said, the Congregation, if such actions are verified, “will regard future complaints of this nature with great seriousness, and if they are verified, it intends to seek disciplinary action consonant with the gravity of the pastoral abuse.”(see the letter:

http://www.adoremus.org/Notitiae-kneeling.html )

Despite this letter from the Vatican, the suppression of kneeling remains strong.
The article in the Vatican newspaper advocating kneeling however signals a sea change.
Those who kneel have a champion in Pope Benedict who prior to his elevation to the pontificate wrote of kneeling and its tie to culture in his book ‘The Spirit of the Liturgy” (Ignatius Press, 2000) “There are groups, of no small influence, who are trying to talk us out of kneeling,” wrote then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. “‘It doesn’t suit our culture’, they say (which culture?) ‘It’s not right for a grown man to do this — he should face God on his feet’.”

Cardinal Ratzinger continued: “The kneeling of Christians is not a form of inculturation into existing customs. It is quite the opposite, an expression of Christian culture, which transforms the existing culture through a new and deeper knowledge and experience of God.

The link below provides The following responses to questions were published in the November-December 2002 edition of Notitiae, the official publication of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. These responses represent the view of the Holy See on the questions of kneeling to receive Holy Communion and the right of Catholics to address concerns to the Holy See.

adoremus.org/Notitiae-kneeling.html

God Bless.
 
Despite this letter from the Vatican, the suppression of kneeling remains strong.
What are your references for that statement? That’s a very broad-sweeping statement and the one example in your post does not convince me that it is necessarily true …

I’d like to believe priests would not refuse the Eucharist to someone kneeling, but I know even priests are human and make mistakes; still, it would be interesting to see the statistics on that statement.

Thanks for posting that.
 
PiV,

The argument that someone following the kneeling communicant might trip is also bogus. If this problem did actually occur, it’s a result of the person following the kneeling communicant. Just like a driver who rear-ends another motorist. It always the fault of the person who hits from behind.
Do you have “I’m kneeling now” lights hung from your back? If you don’t, then this analogy doesn’t work. With no warning you are doing something not expected. So, why are you doing it? I am interested in your motivation.
My question to you is why is my completely legitimate way of receiving Holy Communion (the manner in which all Latin Rite Catholics received Holy Communion for centuries) makes you defensive?
You are not receiving the way it’s been done for centuries. You are walking up to the priest and kneeling, in the middle of a line of people that are walking and standing. The way it’s been done for centuries is walking up to the altar railing, waiting for a space, kneeling at the railing and waiting for the priest to come by. I know, I did that when I was (much) younger. I would love to bring back the altar rail in every Catholic parish in the country - it would facilitate, almost require, Communion on the tongue.
If you’re so concerned about the universality of the Church, then you should be in favor of the use of Latin as the language of the Mass. There’s nothing more universal then the whole Church celebrating the sacrifice of the Mass in the same language. Are you in favor of a universal language for the celebration of the Mass? If not, then you’re not being consistent in your argument.
I am very much in favor of the Church retaining latin as it’s language, and Catholics knowing latin as the common language that bonds us together as a people. That does not mean that the Mass can not be translated into the vernacular.

Quite frankly, we are where we are. To get our brethren at Mass to pick up their game and increase in holiness we do not have to offer the TLM - that is a niche for people interested in it. The new missal is a large step in the direction of reclaiming the beautiful language of the Mass in a way that people in the pews today can appreciate.
 
This thread is no longer serving the spiritual and educational needs of the membership, because it has derailed into an argument and posters are discussing each other instead of the subject on the table.

Please read Posts 10 and 11 and comply.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top