I got in trouble for kneeling to receive Communion

[Joe_5859]

I would speak to the Priest first about this, give a complete history of what the YM did and the ultimatum that he gave and ask him (Priest) what he can do.

If the Priest doesn’t do anything or sides with the YM then I would proceed to write the Bishop of his Diocese and ask for his help.

If the Bishop doesn’t want to do anything or supports the YM position then I would write to the Vatican for help in this matter.

He could also write to the St. Joseph Foundation which handles these types of situations.

st-joseph-foundation.org/

I might further add it would be best to keep it in writing as it can provide for proof in the substantiating of the OP’s claims.

Okay, so you are suggesting he prepare to take this issue all the way to the Vatican. But what does he do in the meantime? Forefeit his position as youth minister? Forgo his service of the youth in his parish for whom he could be a positive role model? And if he’s serious about becoming a priest, does he really want his bishop to think of him as one of those people who are constantly griping about their rights being violated? That could certainly put up a stumbling block when he applies for seminary.

And if he does take it all the way to the top, what then? The Vatican writes him a nice note saying exactly the same thing they’ve said before, “You cannot be denied Communion for kneeling.” Will the Vatican step in and issue a pontifical decree getting him his Youth Ministy job back? Highly doubtful.

So this advice doesn’t really help Hamburglar at all. He still has to decide what’s more important: serving the youth, or receiving while kneeling.

 

[Cristiano]

…So this advice doesn’t really help Hamburglar at all. He still has to decide what’s more important: serving the youth, or receiving while kneeling.

That is not correct! He does not have to decide anything yet. He has to talk to the priest and see how things go. It is ridiculous to decide now on what to do if scenario_1 or scenario_2 or scenario_3 etc. etc. Prudence and Temperance are a Christian virtues. One thing at the time.

 

[KingAlfred]

Not unless the priest has petitioned the CDWDS and recieved a recognitio for any decision contrary to it’s current rulings.

You’re certainly determined. Perhaps this isn’t helping the situation. I’d say if there are kids involved, you should take what’s in their best interest to heart first. After all, if this is a collective youth experience, it’s all about the kids, and not the adults attending to them. Give that some thought.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

I’d see him reported, not to the priest, but the local diocese, if not the local Catholic Rights in the church grouping, I would not allow such disrespect for God and the church by one who clearly knows little or nothing of it, and should never be teaching others, mind you, I may firstly warn or approach the priest, but that boldness is probably mortal sin, as he tempted you to expose the Eucharist, and further public scandal, demanding a response, I would suggest the church fire this individual, if they don’t, the people who don’t are likely guilty of this sacrilegiously incorrect treatment of God. All I say is the belief of the church, and not my own exaggeration- this is horrifically wrong.

In that this act is sacrilegious, and firing on religious belief (vilification is not the same as what I am saying- where these beliefs call groups horrendous names, or lie about them, this is often criminal, however not your situation, which makes such exceptions not valid to me, sad if I hear such a man could harm your self), should not be permitted in any nation, if he hires you as a catholic- then you are more catholic than him in doctrine, he should of course be fired.

 

[MrS]

You’re certainly determined. Perhaps this isn’t helping the situation. I’d say if there are kids involved, you should take what’s in their best interest to heart first. After all, if this is a collective youth experience, it’s all about the kids, and not the adults attending to them. Give that some thought.

If the kids are very young, I don’t think they should chose what is in their best interests. That is ONLY mom and dad’s job… not even the pastor, the Youth Director, etc

If the kids are older, I would hope to give them some credit in their choices. Guidance should be in their best interest… getting to heaven first and foremost.

It is not all about the kids.

It is about the Eucharist. In fact, it is all about the Eucharist. Anything short of that implies less of Him, and more of us.

I am familiar with the Y/D’s position and I understand why he thinks what he thinks… but he is wrong, and a bit weak too. He should have let h/b receive last (no interuption there), and also explained to the special group that was “disrupted” the actual position of the Church, not just the practice of the parish. Instead a policy or discipline has been forced on the group (for no reason other than “this is the practice of the parish”)… just like the change to standing was introduced without reason (sorry, unity in posture already existed) as if it were the only choice possible.

The pastor basically looks the other way.
;

 

[Joe_5859]

That is not correct! He does not have to decide anything yet. He has to talk to the priest and see how things go. It is ridiculous to decide now on what to do if scenario_1 or scenario_2 or scenario_3 etc. etc. Prudence and Temperance are a Christian virtues. One thing at the time.

Yes, you are correct that he take it one step at a time, but that’s not what childofmary is advocating. He is advocating that the OP be ready and determined to take this all the way to the Vatican if need be. Does the OP really want this to be the battle he fights tooth and nail for? Does the OP want his bishop to remember him for this when he sends in his application to be a seminarian?

Certainly, hamburglar can talk to his priest as a first step. But, if I were in his position, I would ask myself: (1) Will my meeting with the pastor on this issue make it back “through the grapevine” to the YM? and (2) If it does make it back to the YM that I approached the pastor about this, what, if any, ramifications would there be? Would it strain the relationship between OP and YM to the point where it would be impossible to work together effectively for the good of the youth?

I’d see him reported, not to the priest, but the local diocese, if not the local Catholic Rights in the church grouping, I would not allow such disrespect for God and the church by one who clearly knows little or nothing of it, and should never be teaching others, mind you, I may firstly warn or approach the priest, but that boldness is probably mortal sin, as he tempted you to expose the Eucharist, and further public scandal, demanding a response, I would suggest the church fire this individual, if they don’t, the people who don’t are likely guilty of this sacrilegiously incorrect treatment of God. All I say is the belief of the church, and not my own exaggeration- this is horrifically wrong.

In that this act is sacrilegious, and firing on religious belief, should not be permitted in any nation, if he hires you as a catholic- then you are more catholic than him in doctrine, he should of course be fired.

I would caution the OP that it is extremely unwise to go above your pastor’s head in the way advocated by the above poster. The Church firmly holds to the principle of subsidiarity (that which can be settled on the lowest level should be settled on the lowest level).

If the OP does go to the bishop first, the first thing the bishop would ask is “What did your pastor do when you told him?” After sheepishly admitting that the pastor was not notified, the bishop would send him back to talk to the pastor.

Further, lobbying for the firing of the YM is only going to serve to shoot yourself in the foot. For one, it paints you out to be an extremist in the eyes of those you are talking to, and no one will take you seriously. It will likely only result in the loss of your own job. Second, there is only one person who can fire the YM: the pastor. Unless the YM is teaching the children open heresy or doing things that violate the Safe Environment protocols, the bishop is not going to intervene and ask the pastor to fire the YM.

 

[japhy]

I’d say if there are kids involved, you should take what’s in their best interest to heart first. After all, if this is a collective youth experience, it’s all about the kids, and not the adults attending to them.

Yes, let’s protect the kids from seeing a man legally kneeling to receive Holy Communion on his tongue. Won’t someone think of the children?!

 

[ethelzguy]

Yes, let’s protect the kids from seeing a man legally kneeling to receive Holy Communion on his tongue. Won’t someone think of the children?!

To conform with the rest of the Communicants would be a demonstration of personal humility, as opposed to making a statement.

Any way you slice it or dice it…acting out of conformity WILL get you noticed, regardless of the purity or righteousness of your intentions. That is your choice. Those that march to the beat of their own drummer get noticed. That’s human nature.

In the gospels, we are admonished to comb our hair and wash our faces, etc when we fast, so as not to bring attention to our personal sacrifice(s).

We are also admonished not to be like the pharisees…“I am thankful Lord, that I am not like these other men” (paraphrased).

 

[MrS]

To conform with the rest of the Communicants would be a demonstration of personal humility, as opposed to making a statement.

Any way you slice it or dice it…acting out of conformity WILL get you noticed, regardless of the purity or righteousness of your intentions. That is your choice. Those that march to the beat of their own drummer get noticed. That’s human nature.

In the gospels, we are admonished to comb our hair and wash our faces, etc when we fast, so as not to bring attention to our personal sacrifice(s).

We are also admonished not to be like the pharisees…“I am thankful Lord, that I am not like these other men” (paraphrased).

If the Y/D implies or instructs incorrectly or incompletely… he is wrong… and that is not fair, you see.

And if he fires a devout young man who could probably just receive last and not be so "disruptive’, then that would truly be sad, you see.

 

[rinnie]

Quite a few years ago I remember my Dad talking about this problem. Father had said that in CHurch he would rather people didnt kneel, the reason being there is such a shortage of priests that it takes alot to time. And being that the priests are so busy it saves them alot to time. This especially in some of these Churchs where they are really big. You would really have Church running over, and the parking lot etc. The other problem is the older people kneel and it takes them so long to get back up. It could take a hour for just communion. But thats why I was told anyway. Hope it helps.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

…The other problem is the older people kneel and it takes them so long to get back up. It could take a hour for just communion. But that’s why I was told anyway. Hope it helps.

Of course with a communion rail there is plenty of time to stand before the priest gets back to that point. **

 

[childofmary1143]

Quite a few years ago I remember my Dad talking about this problem. Father had said that in CHurch he would rather people didnt kneel, the reason being there is such a shortage of priests that it takes alot to time. And being that the priests are so busy it saves them alot to time. This especially in some of these Churchs where they are really big. You would really have Church running over, and the parking lot etc. The other problem is the older people kneel and it takes them so long to get back up. It could take a hour for just communion. But thats why I was told anyway. Hope it helps.

Well if there was a parish that had a large contingent of people who wanted to kneel, then they could construct an altar rail and that would solve the problem (if that can be called a problem).

 

[MrS]

Quite a few years ago I remember my Dad talking about this problem. Father had said that in CHurch he would rather people didnt kneel, the reason being there is such a shortage of priests that it takes alot to time. And being that the priests are so busy it saves them alot to time. This especially in some of these Churchs where they are really big. You would really have Church running over, and the parking lot etc. The other problem is the older people kneel and it takes them so long to get back up. It could take a hour for just communion. But thats why I was told anyway. Hope it helps.

Well, they had to think of something to justify the moderism.

If the altar rail was left in place, the “slow/older” people would have plenty of time to return to the pew before the priest “came back around again” … or they could sit up close, and the priest could come to them.

There is more time spent (not a bad thing IMHO) by many who feel that they need to receive both species from two different locations… I have seen more aisles “blocked” due to this than to any one person, here or there, who chooses to kneel.

As to the “running over” and the “parking lot” issues, perhaps that is just an issue because a few don’t want the Mass to start too early… and a few more need to get somewhere “important” so don’t make it last too late.

There are very few parishes that are so large ( and don’t have an extra priest of deacon) that the Masses are treated like high school classes … limited to uniform/short class time, and short class change time

 

[rinnie]

Well if there was a parish that had a large contingent of people who wanted to kneel, then they could construct an altar rail and that would solve the problem (if that can be called a problem).

I totally agree and wonder if it will ever come back. In my old church they still have it. In my new they dont. So I really think when the quit putting in the rail is when the big problem started. I do miss the old way i really do.

 

[Corki]

Quite a few years ago I remember my Dad talking about this problem. Father had said that in CHurch he would rather people didnt kneel, the reason being there is such a shortage of priests that it takes alot to time. And being that the priests are so busy it saves them alot to time. This especially in some of these Churchs where they are really big. You would really have Church running over, and the parking lot etc.

That makes sense in the current trend of receiving “in line”. I wish I could find an old link I had before my computer crashed. Someone actually did a time study and it takes less time to distribute communion to people kneeling at an altar rail than standing and receiving in line. This seem logical since, in most parishes I have attended, a significant percentage of the people receive in the hand, make a sign of reverance (ie sign of the cross usually) and THEN move out of the way for the next communicant. Given that information, it seems the most efficient is kneeling at a rail, next is standing in a line and least efficient is kneeling in a line.

Sounds like a good reason to bring back the rail.

 

[MrS]

Sounds like a good reason to bring back the rail.

:doh2: :newidea:

 

[AMDGtoo]

I would caution the OP that it is extremely unwise to go above your pastor’s head in the way advocated by the above poster.

Actually, according to Redemptionis Sacramentum we are supposed to have access to the Vatican concerning what could easily be a problem with how the Eucharist is reverenced. But yes, there can be ramifications, so things should be done very charitably, and be documented in writing. And yes, even then, there must be evidence of the problem going “up the chain of command”. And since writing to the Bishop means that the Bishop will contact the priest, if I was going to contact the Bishop, I would make certain that I had all the documentation (the GIRM, the recognitos saying that kneeling is allowed, etc.) on hand.

Oh, I see folks worrying about “strained relations with the YM” if the OP “gets his way and continues kneeling”, and advises h/b to “just stand so the YM will get his way.” Well, have any of you thought that there will be “strained relations with the YM” however way h/b decides? And has any thought that this is a matter of allowing the youth to know that they are allowed to show reverence by kneeling to receive Communion if they so chose? What message are the youth to be given–that man’s opinion is more important than any show of devotion to Jesus even though the Church says that isn’t so?

 

[Joe_5859]

If the Y/D implies or instructs incorrectly or incompletely… he is wrong… and that is not fair, you see.

And if he fires a devout young man who could probably just receive last and not be so "disruptive’, then that would truly be sad, you see.

You may be absolutely, 100% correct that is is “not fair” and “truly sad”. And we can lament the situation until we’re blue in the face, but I don’t think that’s helpful to the OP. The OP still has to answer for himself whether he is willing to take the chance that he “take the bullet” and lose his position in his parish.

Perhaps the OP posesses the necessary oratory skills and the YM the necessary disposition that he may change his mind based on the OP’s testimony. Short of that, the options (as I see them) are to either (1) accept the fact that you probably will be fired, (2) accept the fact that your future dealings with the YM will be strained and difficult (if you get the pastor’s support and do not get fired), or (3) change the posture in which you receive the Eucharist.

Am I missing any?

 

[MrS]

You may be absolutely, 100% correct that is is “not fair” and “truly sad”. And we can lament the situation until we’re blue in the face, but I don’t think that’s helpful to the OP. The OP still has to answer for himself whether he is willing to take the chance that he “take the bullet” and lose his position in his parish.

Perhaps the OP posesses the necessary oratory skills and the YM the necessary disposition that he may change his mind based on the OP’s testimony. Short of that, the options (as I see them) are to either (1) accept the fact that you probably will be fired, (2) accept the fact that your future dealings with the YM will be strained and difficult (if you get the pastor’s support and do not get fired), or (3) change the posture in which you receive the Eucharist.

Am I missing any?

I think you correct with those options.

I would add that #3 could include receiving last in line.

#1 is most likely

 

[Joe_5859]

Actually, according to Redemptionis Sacramentum we are supposed to have access to the Vatican concerning what could easily be a problem with how the Eucharist is reverenced. But yes, there can be ramifications, so things should be done very charitably, and be documented in writing. And yes, even then, there must be evidence of the problem going “up the chain of command”. And since writing to the Bishop means that the Bishop will contact the priest, if I was going to contact the Bishop, I would make certain that I had all the documentation (the GIRM, the recognitos saying that kneeling is allowed, etc.) on hand.

Exactly right, we work up the chain of command. In the same way, if you complain to the Vatican, they’re going to want to know that you contacted your bishop prior to contacting them.

Oh, I see folks worrying about “strained relations with the YM” if the OP “gets his way and continues kneeling”, and advises h/b to “just stand so the YM will get his way.” Well, have any of you thought that there will be “strained relations with the YM” however way h/b decides? And has any thought that this is a matter of allowing the youth to know that they are allowed to show reverence by kneeling to receive Communion if they so chose? What message are the youth to be given–that man’s opinion is more important than any show of devotion to Jesus even though the Church says that isn’t so?

You bring up an excellent point, something else that it would be good for the OP to consider: It may well be that, at this point, the relationship will already be strained. Of course, this is something none of us can answer. And the OP would have to ask himself if that strain would be the same or worse if he made an issue of this.

Many people seem to be arguing as though the OP’s YM is trying to make his own opinion binding on everyone. I think that’s a bit of an unfair presumption. It seems that the YM (however poorly and callously he has gone about it) is trying to maintain what is in the GIRM (and perhaps what he was taught by the pastor). Not everyone knows about the norms in other countries or obscure letters from the CDWDS (which I couldn’t even find on the official Vatican website). I’m not trying to denigrate these things, but we cannot assume that everyone has the same knowledge of all the same Church statements that we do.