Genuflecting just before receiving the Eucharist?

[m134e5]

It’s fine to genuflect before receiving the Eucharist. Please be mindful of others around you when you do it though- don’t drop to the ground so fast that you startle the priest or trip a person behind you (I’ve seen that happen a lot). If people behind you bump into you, they are going too fast- but it’s not good to teach them a lesson by tripping them. You also risk startling the priest if you are right in front of him and drop to the ground suddenly, possibly causing to drop the Sacrament. Walk up to the priest, STOP, then genuflect (reverently, but don’t take all day- only about 3 seconds or so).

 

[zab]

We aren’t to just show “respect” to our Creator. We revere Him. Standing in front of Him and giving a quick head bob is definitely not a sign of reverence. That’s something you might do towards a stranger as you strut down the street.

As I said, I’ll continue to obey our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, and get down on my knees to receive our Eucharistic Lord, regardless of what others may do. The Vicar of Christ is the successor to Peter, the only person who was given the keys to the kingdom of heaven.

You have to ask yourselves, why was standing and receiving in the hand allowed in the first place?? “Because of the hardness of their hearts.” Well, it’s not allowed by our Holy Father. Who are you going to obey? “Whoever hears you, hears Me.”

You may not like it or agree with it but you are incorrect in implying that a bow of the head is not a sign of reverence and that we should disregard this sign of reverence that was established by the conference of Catholic Bishops in the United States. Our Holy Father has never declared that reception of Communion while standing is not allowed as you have said. For now he is giving the example that Communion while kneeling is an excellent example for the reception of Communion but he has not in any way suggested that we should not obey our bishops who have established that standing is the norm. Maybe one day the recommendation to restore our Communion rails will come about. But as it is, we are not at all being disrespectful by following the directives set by our bishops. And it is wrong for you to say otherwise.

Mark Thompson has an excellent post.

 

[mswood]

At our parish we bow as the person in front of us is receiving, this is our diocese’s official way of receiving communion.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

I see your location is in Japan. Wouldn’t a profound bow to the waist a better sign of reverence in the culture of your location (not sure if your Japanese or not so I didn’t say your culture)?

I’m not Japanese. And you’re right: A bow is a sign of respect and the deeper the bow the deeper the showing of respect. So you see, the lower you go the greater the showing of respect - down to prostrating one on the ground.

As with anywhere, a bow would be appropriate, but so would genuflecting.

Pax,
OA

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’m not Japanese. And you’re right: A bow is a sign of respect and the deeper the bow the deeper the showing of respect. So you see, the lower you go the greater the showing of respect - down to prostrating one on the ground.

As with anywhere, a bow would be appropriate, but so would genuflecting.

Pax,
OA

Right. But we should also follow the prescriptions of our Bishops, if there are. I’m unsure what the GIRM for Japan says. The US Bishops has set bowing as the sign of reverence for the laity.

 

[callmeChris]

At my parish sadly, barely anyone genuflects anymore. Im 16 and I genuflect. I make sure that my knee touches that floor. Since I have no problem with my legs, no excuse must be given as to why I cant bow before my God in Holy communion.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I time it so that I genuflect when I’m in full presence of the Blessed Sacrament and no one in front of me is blocking, and when I move forward to receive. So my genuflecting and taking a step forward becomes one motion.

If I were going to do this (I bow, as I would not be able to rise unassisted anyway), I would do it the way they do it at EWTN’s masses, where most of the faithful DO genuflect…while the person ahead of them is receiving.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If I were going to do this (I bow, as I would not be able to rise unassisted anyway), I would do it the way they do it at EWTN’s masses, where most of the faithful DO genuflect…while the person ahead of them is receiving.

I know that I genuflect towards Jesus regardless, but I just want to do it without anyone standing physically between me and Him in the Eucharist. I know, its just me.

 

[Sherry_G]

I know that I genuflect towards Jesus regardless, but I just want to do it without anyone standing physically between me and Him in the Eucharist. I know, its just me.

I’m with you, buddy! In my parish of retired people, many do genuflect before receiving Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist. I am happy to hear that this has caught on in the younger generation as well. Being taught to kneel at the altar rail in my youth, it is nigh on impossible for me to resist the genuflection impulse when in the presence of Jesus as I am about to receive Him. As long as I am physically able I will do so and continue to pray for the reinstallation of the altar rail for communion.

Recently, a person approached with no reverence, and stuck out one hand in a rather offhanded way. Father refused to allow the person to receive Our Lord in that manner! After Mass, he asked the congregation to sit for announcements. He patiently explained proper reverent reception and asked each one of us to consider carefully our attitude before we approach the altar, being sure to be reverent and respectful. He also pointed out that if one did not feel particularly reverent they need not present themselves for reception of Our Lord at all. To refrain under those circumstances would be a more loving and respectful way to deal with Communion.

 

[PKinsale]

Some folks here are too strict in their interpretation of what the U.S. bishops consider reverence, and act as if genuflection before receiving, or kneeling to receive, is outlawed. it is not. Standing to receive and bowing to show reverence, done reverently, are sufficient, but there is nothing at all disobedient about other options.

I receive last in my family. Two of my kids genuflect. Another chooses to kneel to receive. I bow profoundly. We all receive on the tongue. The line moves well, no one is scandalized unless it’s their own fault.

 

[zab]

Some folks here are too strict in their interpretation of what the U.S. bishops consider reverence, and act as if genuflection before receiving, or kneeling to receive, is outlawed. it is not. Standing to receive and bowing to show reverence, done reverently, are sufficient, but there is nothing at all disobedient about other options.

I receive last in my family. Two of my kids genuflect. Another chooses to kneel to receive. I bow profoundly. We all receive on the tongue. The line moves well, no one is scandalized unless it’s their own fault.

I was responding to the person who said that giving a quick nod of the head before receiving while stand was not showing respect. Standing is the norm and the sign of reverence that was established is the bow of the head. So while one may genuflect or kneel with the blessing of the church, they should not attack the manner in which others receive especially when they receive in the norm that was set for us.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Some folks here are too strict in their interpretation of what the U.S. bishops consider reverence, and act as if genuflection before receiving, or kneeling to receive, is outlawed. it is not. Standing to receive and bowing to show reverence, done reverently, are sufficient, but there is nothing at all disobedient about other options.

I receive last in my family. Two of my kids genuflect. Another chooses to kneel to receive. I bow profoundly. We all receive on the tongue. The line moves well, no one is scandalized unless it’s their own fault.

The bishops made a prescription for a reason. Its best to follow them.

 

[PKinsale]

The bishops made a prescription for a reason. Its best to follow them.

Could you perhaps explain this further? I have not seen this word “prescription” used before in a canonical sense as you do. And can you cite this reference? I do not think the bishops here ever speak in such a legalistic way, when so many of them allow a variety of signs of reverence to be given.

Does declaring something as a “norm” mean it is morally required?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Could you perhaps explain this further? I have not seen this word “prescription” used before in a canonical sense as you do. And can you cite this reference? I do not think the bishops here ever speak in such a legalistic way, when so many of them allow a variety of signs of reverence to be given.

Does declaring something as a “norm” mean it is morally required?

Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum states the following:

[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”.*

And in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal:

*160. The priest then takes the paten or ciborium and goes to the communicants, who, as a rule, approach in a procession.

The faithful are not permitted to take the consecrated bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them from one to another. The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.

When receiving Holy Communion, the communicant bows his or her head before the Sacrament as a gesture of reverence and receives the Body of the Lord from the minister. The consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or in the hand, at the discretion of each communicant. When Holy Communion is received under both kinds, the sign of reverence is also made before receiving the Precious Blood.*

GIRM 160 is part of the adaptations and will differ from territory to territory. What I quoted is from the adaptations for the US. You can always refer to GIRM 160 of every territory/country to see what the norms are for that country.

I use the word “prescription” because its a strong recommendation. Not a forceful command but at the same time not merely a suggestion.

 

[PKinsale]

I see in reviewing the record that this was aptly handled in another forum discussion earlier, Receiving Communion. Anything I would have to say has been said there and would be redundant.

 

[BrotherPaulMary]

I think it should be obvious that making a gesture of adoration before reception of Holy Communion is a good thing.

It is also a good thing to make this gesture of adoration as close to the reception as possible.

puzzleannie:

a mark of reverence before reception is required, since in the US at least most people have been kneeling up until the time they actually join the communion procession, that mark has already been given and the genuflexion would seem redundant. In the spirit of humility and obedience we should follow the direction of our pastor and bishop on this point.

I do not think that one can consider that making a bow or a genuflection before reception could be called “redundant”, without over reacting to good intentions.

Secondly as constantine has quoted above - the USCCB recommends a bow. They certainly do not consider it redundant.

Thirdly I do recommend the development of Humility and Obedience because from my conversations with many people in formation and certain other signs in the Church - I can say that things that were originally introduced without authorization will probably be forbidden in the next generation or two of Priests and Bishops.

God Bless

Br. Paul

 

[amgp]

Ditto regarding the fact that this has all been discussed before.

Perhaps ConstatineTG would be best advised to include ALL of the instructions rather than cut & paste portions to suite his or her likes. Quoting certain text without including all of it is rather disingenuous. In addition to the portion of the General Instructions that were conveniently omitted, there are copies of several letters from the Congregation for Divine Worship available. Also, from EWTN’s website:

“The Congregation for Divine Worship, which is the promulgating authority for liturgical law on behalf of the Holy Father, has stated in various Responses to Doubts regarding the proper interpretation of the posture norms for the reverence and for receiving Communion itself, that these norms are not intended to be rigidly applied, precluding kneeling for someone who wants to kneel, or genuflecting before receiving. I have before me at this time such a response from Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect of the CDW, who answers regarding kneeling for Communion as I have stated, and then appends in his own hand that this applies also to genuflecting prior to receiving. No lesser authority in the Church can interpret the norm differently than he.”

As regards to the Holy Father, I’ve watched nearly every televised Papal Mass on EWTN, and Pope Benedict XVI will NOT give Holy Communion to a person unless they are kneeling, and only on the tongue. The commentators usually point out this fact as well.
I, for one, don’t need these instructions in writing, although I’ve read what then Cardinal Ratzinger has written on this in the past, and he’s following through by his actions as Pope. The mere example of the Vicar of Christ is enough for me.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Ditto regarding the fact that this has all been discussed before.

Perhaps ConstatineTG would be best advised to include ALL of the instructions rather than cut & paste portions to suite his or her likes. Quoting certain text without including all of it is rather disingenuous. In addition to the portion of the General Instructions that were conveniently omitted, there are copies of several letters from the Congregation for Divine Worship available. Also, from EWTN’s website:

First, thank you for judging me.

Second, I have quoted the related paragraphs in SC and GIRM w/ US Adaptations. The other paragraphs are unrelated. Notice that I quoted all 3 paragraphs within #160 when it would have been enough to just quote the third one to make my point. Besides, what agenda would I have? I live in Canada, what happens in the US really is none of my concern and doesn’t affect me. I do this because I’m interested in spreading the truth. This topic has been debated to death in another thread. We’ve come to this conclusion. Not without any resistance of course.

“The Congregation for Divine Worship, which is the promulgating authority for liturgical law on behalf of the Holy Father, has stated in various Responses to Doubts regarding the proper interpretation of the posture norms for the reverence and for receiving Communion itself, that these norms are not intended to be rigidly applied, precluding kneeling for someone who wants to kneel, or genuflecting before receiving. I have before me at this time such a response from Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect of the CDW, who answers regarding kneeling for Communion as I have stated, and then appends in his own hand that this applies also to genuflecting prior to receiving. No lesser authority in the Church can interpret the norm differently than he.”

Please read Redemptionis Sacramentum again. It is issued by the CDWDS and it specifically states that the decision to have Communion kneeling and standing falls on the Conference of Bishops of the territory and this would receive the recognitio of the Holy See.

Cardinal Arinze never usurped the Bishops’ authority. He merely clarified that kneeling for Communion and going against the rubrics is not cause for denial for Communion.

As regards to the Holy Father, I’ve watched nearly every televised Papal Mass on EWTN, and Pope Benedict XVI will NOT give Holy Communion to a person unless they are kneeling, and only on the tongue. The commentators usually point out this fact as well.
I, for one, don’t need these instructions in writing, although I’ve read what then Cardinal Ratzinger has written on this in the past, and he’s following through by his actions as Pope. The mere example of the Vicar of Christ is enough for me.

As laudible as what the Holy Father does during his Masses, how Masses are done in each diocese is guided by the appropriate Church documents. And within these documents it states what Bishops can make decisions on. One is the norm for reception of Communion, including the proper gesture of reverence for receiving standing. This is explicit in the document. There is no misleading here. It is more misleading to claim that we follow what the Pope does when the document is very clear on what must be done. Don’t forget that the Pope is also a Bishop of his own diocese (Rome) and also being Pope he’s not governed by the laws of the Church. The Pope can say the law does not apply to him, or simply change the law on a whim. The Bishops are tied to the law and the law says what is in SC and GIRM.

 

[zab]

As laudible as what the Holy Father does during his Masses, how Masses are done in each diocese is guided by the appropriate Church documents. And within these documents it states what Bishops can make decisions on. One is the norm for reception of Communion, including the proper gesture of reverence for receiving standing. This is explicit in the document. There is no misleading here. It is more misleading to claim that we follow what the Pope does when the document is very clear on what must be done. Don’t forget that the Pope is also a Bishop of his own diocese (Rome) and also being Pope he’s not governed by the laws of the Church. The Pope can say the law does not apply to him, or simply change the law on a whim. The Bishops are tied to the law and the law says what is in SC and GIRM.

I’m glad you made this point. When the CDWDS made the clarification that those who kneel to receive Communion were not to be harrassed or accused of being disobedient, I do not think they intended to insult or belittle those who do obey the directives set by their bishops and to imply that they were somehow being less reverent in their reception of Holy Communion.

 

[PKinsale]

Constantine, you make sense to a point. I would caution against scrupulosity on such a point when the bishops, whom you call the rightful authority here, do not see it that way themselves.