F
fix
Guest
Does not the dicastery speak for the Pope?
- Status
F
fix
Guest
I do not think every single contingency can be addressed by any law or norm, that is why there is an interpreter of the law. Who would have ever thought the faithful would be denied communion for kneeling? Such absurdity should not need a formal “law”.I see you edited your post.
This is my point. There are definitely conflicting instructions, which does make it very difficult for both the Pastor and the Faithful. I would like to see something more fiirm.
If kneeling is encouraged by the Vatican, at least rewrite the part about instructing the Communicant.
The instruction on the flagon was rewritten after the kneeling/standing controversary was going on for a while, but kneeling was not addressed.
M
MikeWM
Guest
I know. Hence my post #35, thse letters hadn’t been posted when I made the remarks you quoted me as making. I understand how the Catholic Church works perfectly well, thanks anyway.
Not so. It is the same in the UK. (and no, I’m not going to pull out hundreds of letters and documents to try and prove this. But the ‘norm’ insomuch as it is what everyone does, is to stand).
Yep, the Vatican is so weak it is impotent to stand up against a few people changing the rules. Given a few women have gone out in boats and been ‘made priests’, I expect women priests any day now.
Mike
T
Turtledove
Guest
Who would have ever thought the faithful would be denied communion for kneeling?
One who saw the Norm ( which is Liturgical Law) instructing otherwise. I am not saying that kneeling is wrong, or standing is better. I am saying that these two instructions are conflicting, and since it is such a problem in many Parishes it should be addressed in accordance with Canon Law.
The Girm is saying that the Communicant is to be instructed and the letter (or interpretation) is saying the communicant must not be imposed upon. Now was this letter written in collaboration with the entire committee? There was no modification made to the GIRM (as was with the flagon situation-and even this is still being questioned).
T
Turtledove
Guest
PS Another consideration is obedience. Even though the letter states that a kneeling Communicant is not to be considered disobedient, I do have a problem with any Catholic disregarding the instruction of the Pastor.
A very conservative Priest once told me that you are to obey your Pastor, unless his instruction is against faith or morals. (Any infraction of norms would be his error, not yours)
I sincerely doubt that the posture for Communion is a matter of faith or morals, so the Pastor should be obeyed.
A very conservative Priest once told me that you are to obey your Pastor, unless his instruction is against faith or morals. (Any infraction of norms would be his error, not yours)
I sincerely doubt that the posture for Communion is a matter of faith or morals, so the Pastor should be obeyed.
T
Turtledove
Guest
PPS
Q
qmvsimp
Guest
I don’t think the Pastor has to be obeyed when he’s wrong. Because standing is not mandatory, it is wrong if the Pastor mandates it.
T
Turtledove
Guest
As I said, unless it is faith or morals, I believe obedience takes priority.
Q
qmvsimp
Guest
Update: Pastor is out of town. He probably hasn’t read my letter yet. I’ll post next week, or sooner, if he calls me.
T
Turtledove
Guest
OK, but my problem is with the contradiction in instructions.
He is not “wrong” in enforcing the norm, but the GIRM restricts the manner in which he may enforce, and does not state what is to be done if his instruction is ignored.
We know many Pastors will say they are to be obeyed, if there is a conflict in interpretation. This is the whole problem in a nutshell.
As I said, I was told that the Pastor must be obeyed, unless he is in error in Faith or Morals.
He is not “wrong” in enforcing the norm, but the GIRM restricts the manner in which he may enforce, and does not state what is to be done if his instruction is ignored.
We know many Pastors will say they are to be obeyed, if there is a conflict in interpretation. This is the whole problem in a nutshell.
F
fix
Guest
Some who saw the norm wrote to Rome for clarification and Rome clarified it.
Are dicasteries, which speak for the Pope, now to be minimized?
F
fix
Guest
When a lower authority contradicts a higher authority, one must obey the higher authority.
Please see above.
See above.
M
Melanie01
Guest
I think our priest would have a stroke if you stood for communion and were not infirm. But hey I am apparently schismatic!
F
fix
Guest
§2 Christ’s faithful are at liberty to make known their needs, especially their spiritual needs, and their wishes to the Pastors of the Church.
§3 They have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church.
T
Turtledove
Guest
Hi fix,
And I agree, but there is still the contradictions in instructions. I do not agree with your interpretation of the laws on obedience to the Pastor. Many people, especially the Pastors also do not. This is the problem.
We still have not seen what is to be done if a person is instructed and ignores the instruction—both for the kneeling Communicant, and the Pastor who attempts to enforce the norm.
And I agree, but there is still the contradictions in instructions. I do not agree with your interpretation of the laws on obedience to the Pastor. Many people, especially the Pastors also do not. This is the problem.
We still have not seen what is to be done if a person is instructed and ignores the instruction—both for the kneeling Communicant, and the Pastor who attempts to enforce the norm.
T
Turtledove
Guest
Schismatic? the posture for Communion would certainly not constitute grounds for schism.
Are there other situations?
T
Turtledove
Guest
The GIRM is the highest authority on liturgicl Laws, and I do agree that a person is not to be denied Communion for kneeling.
My question is what is to be done when the person is instructed on the norm, and still ignores his Pastors instruction?
F
fix
Guest
So, the priests think their authority is independent of the Vatican?
The answer has been given by Rome. If a priest rejects that authority, then the bishop would have to intervene.
F
fix
Guest
Rome is the highest authority and they have decided.
The person is to be given communion as Rome has said. I do not see your point?
T
Turtledove
Guest
Obviously we disagree, but you also disagree with the Priest I asked regarding this issue. He stressed obedience to the Pastor, unless it is a matter of Faith or Morals.
RS, which was written after the interpretation in question states
**
90. “The faithful should receive Communion kneeling or standing, as the Conference of Bishops will have determined,” with its acts having received the recognitio of the Apostolic See. “However, if they receive Communion standing, it is recommended that they give due reverence before the reception of the Sacrament, as set forth in the same norms.”176
This instruction does not even recognize that the norm may be ignored.
You are focusing soly on individual expressions of reverence, and totally ignoring all the other instructions, mainly respect for the Pastor or Bishop.
There are many Parishes who do agree with kneeling for Communion and have made provisions for these Communicants. I do feel it is wrong to defy your Pastor if he does not see the need to do this.
**
- Status