Kneeling to receive still a choice?

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Lux, I am afraid that you are the one who is side-steppiing the issue. How can you say (or anyone else, for that matter) with a straight face that a communcant is defying the priest when he chooses to kneel to receive Holy Communion. This line of reasoning goes against what the documents from Rome have said.

Again you have twisted my words.
what I said was

You have always side stepped my point and just kept quoting the letters. It is defying a priest, if he instructs you to stand, and you refuse.

I never said the kneeling was defying the priest. Have you read the rest of the discussion?

Furthermore, the Holy See has been known for taken entire episcopal conferences to task for not obeying the norms. Take the Australians, for example, Pope John Paul II issued a strong reprimand because the bishiops were allowing the wholesale use of General Absolution. Thus, there have been times when conferences have had to be corrected

Now you are comparing requesting a norm be followed with with violating canon law? Very convincing point

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

And even then, the US Bishops themselves approved the norm strictly as a common practice, NOT as a legal norm.

It is a liturgical norm as are all other liturgical norms. Norm is rarely if ever a legal term

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

ps
you misquoted your reference

The chairman of the Bishops Committee on the Liturgy (Archbishop Oscar Lipscomb) said that “norm” is a descriptive term meaning the usual or standard practice, not a legal term.

you said

legal norm.

 

[benedictgal]

Again you have twisted my words.
what I said was

I never said the kneeling was defying the priest. Have you read the rest of the discussion?

Now you are comparing requesting a norm be followed with with violating canon law? Very convincing point

Lux, you are the one who is insisting that those who choose to kneel are defying the priest. This is wrong, especially since Rome has consistently stated that kneeling is not a disobedient act.

Originally Posted by Lux et Tenebrae
It is defying a priest, if he instructs you to stand, and you refuse.
Lux

Furthermore, Rome has also come down harshly on those priests and bishops who have pretty much set roadblocks on the right of hte faithful to receive Holy Communion while they kneel.

I brought up the example of the Australian conference to show that even bishops conferences are subject to correction if they take action that is contrary to what Rome has said.

In addition, you are incorrect in your notion that permission was given to ignore the norm. Kneeling is universal. Standing requires recogitio from the Holy See. Kneeling is not ignoring the norm. In fact, standing was allowed only if the communicant who kneels is not to be denied Holy Communion. In other words, you can stand, but, don’t deny the communicant Our Lord simoply because he is following the universal norm.

 

[tcraig]

For the upteenth time, the US norm is standing. Permission has been granted to ignore the norm, but this does not change the norm.

…and my point has always been that it is better to choose that option than put a personal preference over the instructions of the celebrant and worse yet engage in a battle of wills at the altar.

Lux

I agree with your thoughts.

As someone who attends the EF most Sundays, I have always heard “traditionalists” say that if the priest asks you to do something reasonable then you should honor the wishes of the priest, as he is your spiritual leader. This makes sense to me, as it is a good way to make our wills more docile and helps us overcome pride.

But that seems to be ignored in the OF by many, and personal preference is put higher than the priest’s request.

If one kneels to receive in the OF and the priest makes absolutely no comment, then I don’t see that there’s a problem at all. But if the priest requests one to follow the norm of standing to receive, then I certainly think that subjecting our personal preference in such a small manner can be beneficial and help us grow spiritually.

 

[benedictgal]

I agree with your thoughts.

As someone who attends the EF most Sundays, I have always heard “traditionalists” say that if the priest asks you to do something reasonable then you should honor the wishes of the priest, as he is your spiritual leader. This makes sense to me, as it is a good way to make our wills more docile and helps us overcome pride.

But that seems to be ignored in the OF by many, and personal preference is put higher than the priest’s request.

If one kneels to receive in the OF and the priest makes absolutely no comment, then I don’t see that there’s a problem at all. But if the priest requests one to follow the norm of standing to receive, then I certainly think that subjecting our personal preference in such a small manner can be beneficial and help us grow spiritually.

However, I would ask that you read the following from the letter written by Cardinal Medina when he was prefect of the CDWDS:

Given the importance of this matter, the Congregation would request that Your Excellency inquire specifically whether this priest in fact has a regular practice of refusing Holy Communion to any member of the faithful in the circumstances described above and – if the complaint is verified – that you also firmly instruct him and any other priests who may have had such a practice to refrain from acting thus in the future. Priests should understand that the Congregation will regard future complaints of this nature with great seriousness, and if they are verified, it intends to seek disciplinary action consonant with the gravity of the pastoral abuse.

Therefore, it is a serious matter when the priest refuses someone Communion simply because the communicant chooses to kneel. Inasmuch as Rome granted recognitio for the posture of standing, it was with the strictest understanding that kneeling would also co-exist. Unfortunately, there could be some priests who may not know nor understand this, as noted in this letter.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Lux, you are the one who is insisting that those who choose to kneel are defying the priest. This is wrong, especially since Rome has consistently stated that kneeling is not a disobedient act.

You really need to follow more carefully. I am not discussing whether or not the priest is wrong, but if he instructs a communicant to stand, it is more wrong for the communicant to refuse. Any authority will say to do as you are told, and take it up later, or write a letter of complaint.

Furthermore, Rome has also come down harshly on those priests and bishops who have pretty much set roadblocks on the right of hte faithful to receive Holy Communion while they kneel.

I have asked msany times for reports on this. Do you have any documentation?

In addition, you are incorrect in your notion that permission was given to ignore the norm. Kneeling is universal. Standing requires recogitio from the Holy See. Kneeling is not ignoring the norm. In fact, standing was allowed only if the communicant who kneels is not to be denied Holy Communion. In other words, you can stand, but, don’t deny the communicant Our Lord simoply because he is following the universal norm

The correct wording was given in another thread, but you refuse to accept it. The universal norm is kneeling or standing as instructed by the bishop’s conference, so in the US it is standing.

Lux

 

[benedictgal]

You really need to follow more carefully. I am not discussing whether or not the priest is wrong, but if he instructs a communicant to stand, it is more wrong for the communicant to refuse. Any authority will say to do as you are told, and take it up later, or write a letter of complaint.

I have asked msany times for reports on this. Do you have any documentation?

The correct wording was given in another thread, but you refuse to accept it. The universal norm is kneeling or standing as instructed by the bishop’s conference, so in the US it is standing.

Lux

Lux, the letters that I have cited come from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. They overrule and outweigh the various episcopal conferences.

This is the full text of the letter written by Cardinal Medina when he was the Prefect of the CDWDS:

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has recently received reports of members of the faithful in your Diocese being refused Holy Communion unless while standing to receive, as opposed to kneeling. The reports state that such a policy has been announced to parishioners. There were possible indications that such a phenomenon might be somewhat more widespread in the Diocese, but the Congregation is unable to verify whether such is the case. This Dicastery is confident that Your Excellency will be in a position to make a more reliable determination of the matter, and these complaints in any event provide an occasion for the Congregation to communicate the manner in which it habitually addresses this matter, with a request that you make this position known to any priests who may be in need of being thus informed.

***The Congregation in fact is concerned at the number of similar complaints that it has received in recent months from various places, and considers any refusal of Holy Communion to a member of the faithful on the basis of his or her kneeling ***posture to be a grave violation of one of the most basic rights of the Christian faithful, namely that of being assisted by their Pastors by means of the Sacraments (Codex Iuris Canonici, canon 213). In view of the law that “sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them” (canon 843 ¶ 1), there should be no such refusal to any Catholic who presents himself for Holy Communion at Mass, except in cases presenting a danger of grave scandal to other believers arising out of the person’s unrepented public sin or obstinate heresy or schism, publicly professed or declared. Even where the Congregation has approved of legislation denoting standing as the posture for Holy Communion, in accordance with the adaptations permitted to the Conferences of Bishops by the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani n. 160, paragraph 2, it has done so with the stipulation that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds.

In fact, as His Eminence, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has recently emphasized, the practice of kneeling for Holy Communion has in its favor a centuries-old tradition, and it is a particularly expressive sign of adoration, completely appropriate in light of the true, real and substantial presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ under the consecrated species.

Given the importance of this matter, the Congregation would request that Your Excellency inquire specifically whether this priest in fact has a regular practice of refusing Holy Communion to any member of the faithful in the circumstances described above and – if the complaint is verified – that you also firmly instruct him and any other priests who may have had such a practice to refrain from acting thus in the future. Priests should understand that the Congregation will regard future complaints of this nature with great seriousness, and if they are verified, it intends to seek disciplinary action consonant with the gravity of the pastoral abuse.

Thanking Your Excellency for your attention to this matter and relying on your kind collaboration in its regard

This letter also appeared in Notiate, the official publication of the CDWDS. As this official letter stated, recognitio was given for standing so long as kneeling was also given its place.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

ps Where have you ever seen any authentic documentation that kneeling is allowed because it is the universal norm? I have seen it allowed because of tradition, nothing about a universal norm.

 

[benedictgal]

ps Where have you ever seen any authentic documentation that kneeling is allowed because it is the universal norm? I have seen it allowed because of tradition, nothing about a universal norm.

Try looking up the Latin version of the GIRM. Furthermore, why are you challenging what the CDWDS has already written and ruled upon? The fact that the CDWDS is the governing body for the liturgy means that it has effectively spoken to the matter. What further need do you have for witnesses, Lux? Why not take the CDWDS at its word? Remember, they are the ones who grant the recognitio. And, in this case, they granted it with the understanding that kneeling was to co-exist.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Lux, the letters that I have cited come from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. They overrule and outweigh the various episcopal conferences.

This is the full text of the letter written by Cardinal Medina when he was the Prefect of the CDWDS:

This letter also appeared in Notiate, the official publication of the CDWDS. As this official letter stated, recognitio was given for standing so long as kneeling was also given its place.

…and your point is???

still no documentation on any action taken, anything about a universal norm being kneeling, or that a communicant should refuse to stand, if the priest directs him/her.

Lux

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Try looking up the Latin version of the GIRM

Joysong posted this for you in another thread and it is as I said. Surely you haven’t forgotten?

 

[benedictgal]

…and your point is???

still no documentation on any action taken, anything about a universal norm being kneeling, or that a communicant should refuse to stand, if the priest directs him/her.

Lux

I invite you to please re-read the letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. The Congregation (read: Holy See) supercede the episcopooal conferences. They are the ones who grant the recognitio on anything the conferences send. The Holy See told the USCCB that standing would be granted a recognitio so long as kneeling was also recognized.

You cannot be defying nor disobedient if Rome has already reognized kneeling. What is so hard to understand about that? You have already been given enough documentation and proof to verify this point.

 

[benedictgal]

Joysong posted this for you in another thread and it is as I said. Surely you haven’t forgotten?

No, but, I think that you have forgotten that standing came with a huge string attached. This string involved kneeling.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

You cannot be defying nor disobedient if Rome has already reognized kneeling. What is so hard to understand about that? You have already been given enough documentation and proof to verify this point.

What is so hard to understand about obeying a priest?

still no documentation on any action taken, anything about a universal norm being kneeling, or that a communicant should refuse to stand, if the priest directs him/her.

 

[benedictgal]

What is so hard to understand about obeying a priest?

still no documentation on any action taken, anything about a universal norm being kneeling, or that a communicant should refuse to stand, if the priest directs him/her.

However, if the priest is wrong, he is wrong. The letters from Rome have consistently upheld the right of the faithful to kneel. Read between the lines, Lux. Kneeling is a valid posture. A priest cannot accuse someone of going against the norm if that norm is kneeling. Why can you not see that? Why would Rome consistently uphold something if it wasn’t a valid norm? Think about it.

 

[Brendan]

What is so hard to understand about obeying a priest?.

Well, no one is disobeying a priest, the CDWDS said so.

 

[Brendan]

I invite you to please re-read the letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. The Congregation (read: Holy See) supercede the episcopooal conferences. .

And here would be the relevant section from one of the dubia

As the authority by virtue of whose recognitio the norm in question has attained the force of law, this Dicastery is competent to specify the manner in which the norm is to be understood for the sake of a proper application. Having received more than a few letters regarding this matter from different locations in the United States of America, the Congregation wishes to ensure that its position on the matter is clear.

To this end, it is perhaps useful to respond to your inquiry by repeating the content of a letter that the Congregation recently addressed to a Bishop in the United States of America from whose Diocese a number of pertinent letters had been received. The letter states: “… while this Congregation gave the recognitio to the norm desired by the Bishops’ Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion.”

 

[benedictgal]

And here would be the relevant section from one of the dubia

Thank you, Brendan!

If kneeling weren’t a universal posture, why would the Holy See be adamant about defending it? Why would the Holy Father and the Congregation issue document after document affirming this posture as legitimate? Even Archbishop Malcolm Rajith, the Secretary to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is now having communicants kneel to receive Our Lord from him.

I would hazard a guess to say that perhaps the ones who are refusing to allow this posture would be disobedient to the Holy See, given the severity in the tone of the letter that Cardinal Medina wrote. He wasn’t writing this letter as personal opinion. He was speaking in the name of and for the Congregation, and the Holy See. HIs successor, Francis Cardinal Arinze, has consistently affirmed this posture, as well.

Yes, recognitio was given to stand. No one is arguing that point. However, when the Holy Father, two prrefects of the CDWDS (past and presnet) and the Secretary to that same congregation consistently affirm kneeling as legitimate, then the argument it lost.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

In response to the original question-

Kneeling to receive still a choice?

Yes, it is still a choice, but possibly not the best choice, especially if the priest/celebrant prefers the standing posture.

Lux