Kneel? Stand? What would you do?

[wcknight]

I feel better kneeling, I feel very awkward standing or sitting (as in some Churches that do not have kneelers.

I have bad knees, and a bad back, but I kneel on the bare floor when I usher (even though we’re told not to, it can be a hazard to someone walking by). BUT that’s just me, I still like the Latin mass and I really miss the Communion rail…

They had that in a Church in Milan, and I was overjoyed… I had not seen or experienced that in over 20 years. It brought back memories of my youth…

Those were the good old days !

WC

 

[wcknight]

When in Rome…

When I visit some other parish, I will stand if everyone else is standing or sit or kneel or whatever.

It’s their parish they can do as they are instructed by their pastor.

When you’re in MY parish you better do as we do !!!

… no, you can do as you please, the ushers really don’t care… if you want to be different that is fine with us. You may stick out like a sore thumb, as everyone else will be kneeling…

wc

 

[Asimis]

Mysty101:

I see, you have not even entered the Church, but you already know how it should be. All the US shepherds are wrong. You are right.

Great attitude.

You have self-stigmatized yourself. I have accused nobody here. Also what do you know about what I know about The Church?

So it is arrogance to prefer the TM over the NO that I was attending?

 

[Asimis]

Michael_Thoma:

This is a bit of a broad sweeping generalization!

Well, this is my personal experience. I know from others that there are more reverent NO Masses which do not undermine the dogma of the Real Presence, which is in fact the heart of the Mass.

What do you think of the Eastern Churches, are we “irreverent”?

No, the Holy Church said in the Vatican II Council that the rites of the Easter Churches are legitimate and are to be preserved. So I asume they are fine.

I hope you are attending an Indult Mass and not one of those Schismatic SSPX ones.

No, the TM I am going to is in communion with Rome. They are not SSPX but legitimate.

 

[Mysty101]

Asimis:

You have self-stigmatized yourself. I have accused nobody here. Also what do you know about what I know about The Church?

So it is arrogance to prefer the TM over the NO that I was attending?

no, it is arrogance to come to a forum of Catholics and tell them they should worship differently than their aproved norms

everyone kneels and takes communion in the mouth as it should be.

GIRM # 160
**
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.

Actually the TLM Masses, and some of its traditions were allowed to accommodate the older people who remembered it that way, not to encourage converts to act like they know better than their shepherd.**

 

[Mysty101]

Kelly:

Mysty,
I’m really intersted, what would constitute a “major” liturgical abuse to you? The other question in my mind is why are minor abuses totally irrelavant to you?

It’s listed in RS.

Minor abuses are not totally irrevalant. If I see something which does not seem right to me, I speak to my Pastor about it, but I am certainly not going to make an issue about something like hand holding during the Lord’s Prayer, or something of that sort.

And I would never write my Bishop about something minor. Chances are he would back the Pastor, and even if not, I feel my Pastor deserves my support. I can’t imagine that he would ever do anything seriously wrong. Of course some Parishes do have major abuses, but I hope and pray that I would have a different Parish I could attend, and if not, I would shut my mouth and be greatful I had a Mass to attend.

 

[Asimis]

Mysty101:

no, it is arrogance to come to a forum of Catholics and tell them they should worship differently than their aproved norms

I see, so one can’t have a preference even when the aproved norms allow it.

GIRM # 160

It allowes one to kneel, so there is no problem. I don’t see why you are complaining, really.

Actually the TLM Masses, and some of its traditions were allowed to accommodate the older people who remembered it that way, not to encourage converts to act like they know better than their shepherd.

This is a fallacy some always commit, there are many young people who prefer the TM over the NO.

 

[Mysty101]

Asimis:

I see, so one can’t have a preference even when the aproved norms allow it.
.

Of course you may have a preference, but don’t come in here and tell faithful Daily Communicants (who do follow their Bishop) what SHOULD be done

everyone kneels and takes communion in the mouth as it should be.

We do what should be done.

This is a fallacy some always commit, there are many young people who prefer the TM over the NO

I am not saying who prefers what, I am merely stating the reasons why it is still allowed.
What about attitude? I really don’t have a problem with allowable options, but I do have a problem with a “new kid on the block” saying that the Bishops do not know what is best for the flock. Yes kneeling is allowed in a TLM, but in other places, especially when there are no provisions, you are told to stand.

re kneeling

1. … 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.

This is you should kneel?

…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.

And this says you should receive on the tongue?

 

[Asimis]

Mysty101:

Of course you may have a preference, but don’t come in here and tell faithful Daily Communicants (who do follow their Bishop) what SHOULD be done.

We do what should be done.

You seem to feel threatened by the fact that I consider reception of communion both kneeling and in the tongue more reverent than standing and in the hand.

I am not saying who prefers what, I am merely stating the reasons why it is still allowed.

Then what is the problem? Both are allowed, you do standing and in the hand, I’ll do kneeling and in the tongue. Both happy and legal, right?

What about attitude? I really don’t have a problem with allowable options, but I do have a problem with a “new kid on the block” saying that the Bishops do not know what is best for the flock. Yes kneeling is allowed in a TLM, but in other places, especially when there are no provisions, you are told to stand.

First off, I didn’t even mention Bishops and much less did I mention anyone else. I stated my personal preference, and yes I consider it to be what should be done because it pays due honor to the dogma of the Real Presence. Vatican II tells us that we are to follow our conscience in what concerns God and his Church. Both kneeling and standing for communion are allowed, I think kneeling is better and you think standing is better(I assume) both options are allowed, nobody is violating any rules here, so everybody is fine. Again, what is the problem?

As far as your “a new kid on the block” accusation, it is in a word, discouraging.

And this says you should receive on the tongue?

Again, you seem to have a problem with someone who considers the TM, kneeling and reception of communion in the tongue to be a more honorable and reverent Mass/reception of communion. If both options are allowed and both Masses as well (read Ecclesia Dei) then nobody is violating any rules here.

 

[Ulysses]

I travel to places where some Churches do not have kneelers, or worse, there are kneelers, but the people stand anyway at the Consecration. I kneel in both cases.

 

[Asimis]

deleted.

 

[Mysty101]

Asimis:

First off, I didn’t even mention Bishops and much less did I mention anyone else. I stated my personal preference, and yes I consider it to be what should be done because it pays due honor to the dogma of the Real Presence.

If you feel there is an option, then it is what may be done, not what should be done. The word “should” implies any other option is wrong. If you are in the US, and attending a NO Mass, you should follow the US adaptations of the GIRM, and not tell faithful Catholics they should do something else.

1. The gestures and posture of the priest, the deacon, and the ministers, as well as those of the people, ought to contribute to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, so that the true and full meaning of the different parts of the celebration is evident and that the participation of all is fostered.52 Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.

A common posture, to be observed by all participants, is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered for the Sacred Liturgy: it both expresses and fosters the intention and spiritual attitude of the participants.

 

[BlindSheep]

Kielbasi:

I’d follow the lead of the other people there, kneeling when everyone else is standing, is calling attention to yourself as “more holy” than the rest.

Not an appropriate message IMO.

I’d kneel anyway. I’m not doing it to ‘send a message’ to the other people in Church, but rather to myself and Jesus, of reverence and humility, not superiority. If it’s the right thing to do, we ought to do it regardless of what other people are or aren’t doing .

 

[Asimis]

Mysty101:

If you feel there is an option, then it is what may be done, not what should be done. The word “should” implies any other option is wrong. If you are in the US, and attending a NO Mass, you should follow the US adaptations of the GIRM, and not tell faithful Catholics they should do something else.

Sorry but I do not fall for the political correctness mindset. If I have something in mind I will speak out. And as I noted in my first post in this thread, I go to a TM and not to the NO, I did not tell the people in the NO to kneel because I thought that it was what they should do. I simply left and went to a TM.

 

[Asimis]

BlindSheep:

I’d kneel anyway. I’m not doing it to ‘send a message’ to the other people in Church, but rather to myself and Jesus, of reverence and humility, not superiority. If it’s the right thing to do, we ought to do it regardless of what other people are or aren’t doing .

 

[Mysty101]

That is the Protestant way of thinking!!

 

[Asimis]

Mysty101:

That is the Protestant way of thinking!!

No Mysty, nobody is in “protestant way of thinking”, I am obeying the Church when I go into a TM (read Ecclesia Dei), the TM is a valid Mass, codified by a Saint(Pius V) and aproved by The Church. So where is the problem in attending it?

 

[Mysty101]

Can’t you understand???

My problem is not with you attending any valid option. My problem is your attitude.-- saying how it should be, when you are just coming into the Church, and the USCCB has different approved norms.

I am sorry to be so harsh, but I feel it would be much better if US Catholics deferred to their shepherds. It is very protestant to think that your preference should take priority over your Bishop, regardless of the fact that the option is legitimate.

It is unfortunate that many cannot accept V II, but it is here to stay, and it would be better if everybody accepted this and the Church was more unified.

 

[Asimis]

Mysty101:

Can’t you understand???

I am perfectly clear. You on the other hand seem to be confused.

My problem is not with you attending any valid option. My problem is your attitude.-- saying how it should be, when you are just coming into the Church, and the USCCB has different approved norms.

You seem to be assuming quite a lot with your constant “you are just coming into the Church” claims. Tell me Mysty101, what do you know about what I know about The Church? How does the simple fact that I am currently doing RCIA (only because it is the only option I have to join) makes me ignorant of The Church and her teachings?

I am sorry to be so harsh, but I feel it would be much better if US Catholics deferred to their shepherds. It is very protestant to think that your preference should take priority over your Bishop, regardless of the fact that the option is legitimate.

Great. You rebuke my preference of the TM over the NO and now tell me that you feel that it would be much better if we deferred to our shepherds. That is, it is you preference that everyone should summit to the Bishop no matter what. No, Mysty101, that is called blind and unrestrained obedience. You are aware I imagine of the abuses that many Bishops, whom you say we should summit entirely to, are now doing in the “spirit of Vatican II”? That is, the things they do IN SPITE of what The Church and Vatican II teach. Should we obey those things? No. We should obey The Church and it is from obedience to The Church that Bishops gain their authority. If the bishops differe from the teachings of The Church (and they can and do) then they become heretics, but not because you or I say so, but because The Church, by her own teachings declares them as such.

It is unfortunate that many cannot accept V II, but it is here to stay, and it would be better if everybody accepted this and the Church was more unified.

When have I said that I do not accept Vatican II? I do. Now, is the priest who is saying the NO Mass you go to and the Bishop that approves it obeying the council? There are many who do not, and in the “spirit of Vatican II” are doing serious damage to The Church.

 

[Emily_Watson]

Different rites have different norms as well. Having attended a Maronite rite mass for some time, the norm is to stand. Since the English Mass had most of the folks coming from a Latin rite, about half would kneel on the floor and half would stand. So for me, there is not a distraction for there to be some standers and some kneelers. I would likley stand if there were no kneelers on the pews. Sadly, most of those in our Latin Rite parish would probably sit in the absense of kneelers.

I also think that if you are looking around for those who are kneeling and those who are standing, you are not paying attention to where you should be focused.