Correct posture for receiving communion

[Phemie]

Don9of11;5579261:

quote.
While the note in the bulletin correctly stated that an individual is not to be denied communion if he or she kneels, it wrongfully declared that kneeling or genuflecting is not permitted. There was even a twist in the instruction that is supposed to read that such persons should be instructed as to why the bishops have chosen the norm, but it turned into something that sounds more demanding. The bulletin note comes across as being condescending toward those who choose to kneel and that is not supposed to happen. The CDWDS reply said, “*Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion”. *

Based on that quote from the CDWDS one has to wonder why the US adaptations to the GIRM were allowed to be published as written.

 

[zab]

zab;5586267:

Based on that quote from the CDWDS one has to wonder why the US adaptations to the GIRM were allowed to be published as written.

Could you explain further what you mean?

 

[Don9of11]

The question I have is this: how accurately does the bulletin accouncement reflect the actual words of the bishop? I checked the diocese website but I couldn’t find the document, so I’m unable to compare the two.

I also checked the diocese website but couldn’t find the document. I sent in a general email through their contact form and got an auto response email reply that I have to wait until the 19th for an official reply.

 

[brittrossiter]

I also checked the diocese website but couldn’t find the document. I sent in a general email through their contact form and got an auto response email reply that I have to wait until the 19th for an official reply.

These are good questions - I too cannot find the announcement on the Diocesan website.

The bulletin insert quoted by the OP contained only the priest’s paraphrasing of “[t]he Bishop’s recent instructions”. Those “instructions” may have been verbal, or in a private instruction to the priests, or in an article in the Catholic Universe Bulletin (our Diocese newspaper), or in a paper memorandum that hasn’t been scanned and uploaded onto the Diocese website.

Father’s definition of “recent” may also be a bit, um, generous - perhaps he is referring to something + Bishop Pilla had said.

If you hear anything from the chancery about this, please post - today is the 19th.

 

[Don9of11]

I haven’t received a response yet to my initial email inquiry to the Cleveland Diocese website. So I “rang the door bell once again to see if anyone was home”…ie, I sent off another email

It could be I may have to call and speak to someone directly.

 

[Debra_C]

My bad.

I checked the sticky. There is no moratorium on discussing receiving Communion standing/kneeling. In any case, I’m concerned about the discussion reaching the point where it might have to be added to the list, so I’ll refrain from further comments. Please read the letter from the Holy See, and again, if you want to know what the bishop said, please do contact him directly and ask him what he actually said.

Obviously you have some concerns about what you read in the bulletin, the best way to resolve those concerns is to go to the source: in this case, the bishop; not because he wrote the bulletin announcement, but because the announcement is claiming to repeat what the bishop said.

I believe I remember pretty much those exact words in a document I found at the USCCB website (usccb.org) regarding norms for reception of communion in the United States. I suspect that document is likely the original source, though, since its publishing a number of things have come about. One such development is Pope Benedict XVI requiring that all receiving Communion at papal masses must now kneel and receive on the tongue. As a result, I suspect there is potential for these norms to be reviewed and or modified in the future.

 

[Brendan]

I As a result, I suspect there is potential for these norms to be reviewed and or modified in the future.

Sort of,

To use a secular analogy, these are laws. Like secular laws, they are interpreted by the courts. In this case Canon 16 gives the right to authentically interpret the laws to the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, as they are ones who give the Vatican approval, or recognito, to the GIRM and it’s local variants.

This is kind of like the Supreme Court ruling on a law. The law itself, the written words, do not change, but they must be enforced by the ‘police’ and ‘lower courts’ in light of the Supreme Court ruling on the matter.

Such is the case for this. The ‘Supreme Court’, the CDWDS, has given it’s rulings and published them.

So we have the Authentic Interpretation of the GIRM on this matter. As such, it would be up to no ones personal interpretation if that personal interpretation was contrary to Prot. n. 47/03/L ( see Fr. David’s post - post #2)

 

[FrDavid96]

Sort of,

To use a secular analogy, these are laws. Like secular laws, they are interpreted by the courts. In this case Canon 16 gives the right to authentically interpret the laws to the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, as they are ones who give the Vatican approval, or recognito, to the GIRM and it’s local variants.

This is kind of like the Supreme Court ruling on a law. The law itself, the written words, do not change, but they must be enforced by the ‘police’ and ‘lower courts’ in light of the Supreme Court ruling on the matter.

Such is the case for this. The ‘Supreme Court’, the CDWDS, has given it’s rulings and published them.

So we have the Authentic Interpretation of the GIRM on this matter. As such, it would be up to no ones personal interpretation if that personal interpretation was contrary to Prot. n. 47/03/L ( see Fr. David’s post - post #2)

If I may, I think what Debra is saying is that the current norms (the indult making standing the norm in the US) might someday be changed to reflect the universal norm of the Church (kneeling). In other words, the indult might be rescinded. If that happens, then of course, the change in law would abrogate the interpretations of it which would no longer apply. Again, IF that were to happen, the part of the interpretation which says that communicants may kneel would not be changed, but the part of the interpretation which says that communicants may stand would no longer apply.

 

[Don9of11]

I never received a reply from the Bishops office. But I did read the article at the usccb.org/liturgy/girm/bul5.shtml

I just have one question. When our children receive communion for the first time at First Communion, they kneel down, at least in my parish. Shouldn’t this change now? Why kneel for your first communion but all the rest of your life you are asked to stand? Shouldn’t first communicates stand? What level of reverence and adoration is present during first communion that we want our first communicates to kneel but afterwords we want them to stand. Aren’t we sending a mixed message?

 

[zab]

I never received a reply from the Bishops office. But I did read the article at the usccb.org/liturgy/girm/bul5.shtml

I just have one question. When our children receive communion for the first time at First Communion, they kneel down, at least in my parish. Shouldn’t this change now? Why kneel for your first communion but all the rest of your life you are asked to stand? Shouldn’t first communicates stand? What level of reverence and adoration is present during first communion that we want our first communicates to kneel but afterwords we want them to stand. Aren’t we sending a mixed message?

Interesting question and you make a good point. However, I recall my First Holy Communion at a time when the Communion rail was still up and seldom did lay persons enter the sanctuary. There were two occassions when lay persons were allowed into the sanctuary during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and that was during the sacraments of Matrimony and First Communion. When it was time for the First Communicants to receive Communion, the gate was opened and we filed two by two up the stairs and knelt at the prie dieu to receive Communion from the priest. It was a special day. I think it is OK for your children to kneel to make their First Holy Communion. But I think it would be nice And I have sometimes wondered if the practice of First Communicants going up into the sanctuary to receive Communion could be done again. Today the bride and groom still receive Communion in the sanctuary.

 

[puzzleannie]

the bishop of your diocese has made his recommendation, he is entirely within Church norms, it remains only for the faithful to obey.

commiseration and prayers in the face of the parish closings and mergers in Cleveland. I took the opportunity while visiting in July to visit some of the old historic churches that are closing, near west side, west side, east side, of the city (did not get to the burbs) kind of a sad pilgrimage.

I hope the pastors of the merged parishes are careful to welcome and shepherd, especially explaining and resolving differences in “how we have always done it here”.