Kneeling vs Standing

  • Thread starter Thread starter steve975
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
At our Parish both kids of genuflection are done when a person comes into the church for Adoration of the Exposed Blessed Sacrament…depending on what they are able to do. Some who are not able to do either, make a profound bow. At the parish we went to for awhile in Idaho, some would lay prostrate on the carpeted floor in front of Our Lord but just in the Adoration Chapel. :love: :yup:
What’s a shame is that many people, on coming in to Mass or on leaving, make no effort at all to bow or genuflect, :confused: including my 4 older grandkids who have been raised Catholic in Catholic school. It was difficult to do when we were in the old church which was cramped and in the round so if you genuflected you often were doing it toward the people on the other side of the room. :ehh: Now we have a traditional church and people have forgotten their manners. :tsktsk: I do intend, at some time, to talk to my grandkids about it. If I tell the youngest, 13, whom we pick up from school twice a week, do you think it will trickle up to the rest? :hmmm: M.A.
 
What is it with people not kneeling when there are no kneelers? There are no kneelers at my parish, and everyone kneels regardless.

Good Catholics have strong knees, and hooles in their pants. 😛
 
Hi again,

There are certainly many good reasons for kneeling, but there are also many for respect, even when we disagree.

As was established there is nothing actually “wrong” with standing, since it is the norm in many places, but there is much to be said for respecting a priest, in scripture and canon law, as well as the Catechism.
Ps 40
3 sacrifice and offering you do not want; but ears open to obedience you gave me. Holocausts and sin-offerings you do not require;
8
so I said, “Here I am; your commands for me are written in the scroll.
9
To do your will is my delight; my God, your law is in my heart!”
If the priest is instructing us to do something which is not against doctrine or morals, we are called to follow this instruction.

If we feel it is a liturgical abuse we are told how to address it—in charity.

Lux
 
Suppose he told you to come up on the altar and say the words of consecration with him.
RS is very specific about which abuses are considered grave. I have posted links and quotes many times.

Perhaps you might want to check it our, and also canon law about respecting priests.

It is ultimately your decision about what you consider a priority. I personally will respect a priest, rather than insist on which posture shows more reverence.

Lux
 
Or kneel anyway. 🙂
Which violates the instructions in the GIRM. The USCCB 2005 edition, #43, ends with:
USCCB:
With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions which the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal.
Litugicam Authenticam and Redemtoris Sacramentum provide that you have the duty to complain after to the priest or his bishop. They do not provide permission to ignore the priest’s instructions on posture during the mass.
 
RS is very specific about which abuses are considered grave. I have posted links and quotes many times.

Perhaps you might want to check it our, and also canon law about respecting priests.

It is ultimately your decision about what you consider a priority. I personally will respect a priest, rather than insist on which posture shows more reverence.

Lux
You did not answer my questions. What would you do in those circumstances?
 
I won’t dignify such nonsense with a serious response.

Ask me a reasonable question, and I will give a reasonable response.

Hint—we are speaking of minor situation of posture of the congregation, not of major abuse.

Lux
 
I won’t dignify such nonsense with a serious response.

Ask me a reasonable question, and I will give a reasonable response.

Hint—we are speaking of minor situation of posture of the congregation, not of major abuse.

Lux
There are definitely different levels of abuse, major and minor. So if the priest asks you to participate in minor abuse it is ok, but questions about major abuse should not be dignified with a serious response.

Maybe an analogy to the major and minor types of abuse are mortal and venial sins. What happens when venial sins are allowed to take root, when we make believe they do not matter?

The situations I described happened in the local parish and worse. One associate processed in wearing street clothes while a woman was wearing priestly vestments. She said Mass while he sat in the pew. He is the one who had the breakdown, the founder of the gay magazine. The bishop knew about it. When one young parishoner ran out of the Mass and went directly to tell the bishop what was going on the bishop told him to mind his business. Surely you would agree that this qualifies as major abuse, the kind you won’t dignify with a response, but guess how it all got started in this parish. Hint - It had to do with posture.

You insist that the people should follow the priest’s instructions to keep sacred uniformity of posture and if they do not like breaking the norms they should complain. Have you ever done that? Or is the minor abuse ok with you?
 
OK point taken, and I do sincerely apologize.

I would refuse, and find another Parish.

But in all sincerity, I don’t think the standing question is in the same category. I would obey in a posture situation.

Any other situation would need to be evaluated.

Lux
 
You insist that the people should follow the priest’s instructions to keep sacred uniformity of posture and if they do not like breaking the norms they should complain. Have you ever done that? Or is the minor abuse ok with you?
Thankfully, I have never felt the need to complain, although I have been praying on a situation for some time.

As an EMHC, I asked the Pastor to address self intinction. I said I would cover the Chalice, if someone attempted to “dip” the host. I was told I was not allowed to deny Communion. I resigned as a scheduled EMHC.

In hindsight I would have just prevented the self intinction, and not mentioned it. This is what I do, if I am asked to serve when the scheduled EMHC’s don’t show up.

Lux
 
OK point taken, and I do sincerely apologize.

I would refuse, and find another Parish.

But in all sincerity, I don’t think the standing question is in the same category. I would obey in a posture situation.

Any other situation would need to be evaluated.

Lux
Thank you for being clear.

It is difficult to face difficult situtations where the cause is known and not over react to it, to try to prevent it from happening again. It is also diffcult to know what over reaction is, when prudence and caution turn to over reaction.

One of the effects of the scandals on me, and personally encountering morally failed clergy is distrust. Clergy were once implicitly trusted. That was probably a mistake. We are all fallen creatures. I went from implicitly trusting to realizing that was not prudent, but still trusting until there was reason to distrust. But then it was too late. Now I do not trust the clergy until I get to know them, or someone I know and trust knows them.

I have found that as a general rule heterodox priests, the dissenters are also generally lax in following liturgical norms and personal disciplines. So when I see a priest instruct the people to not follow Church instructions, but follow his instead, warning flags go up. This may be an over reaction resulting from some bad experiences, but maybe not.

I know some clergy I consider to be very holy men. They want to be transparent and accountable. They have nothing to hide and realizing the devastation that was caused by fallen priests they are careful not to do anything that might cause concern. It is a shame this is how things are now. The laity can be helpful in repairing the damage and also in keeping it from happening again. When priests take license to do things that are improper, whatever they are, they need to be confronted.

The sad truth is that the enormity of the scandals could not have happened if the bishops were doing their jobs. At best they made very poor bonehead decisions and at worst were complicit. Either way, what they have taught us is they can not be trusted to make good decisions and exercise their offices without oversight. Rome did not provide that oversight until it was too late, and the problems are far from solved. The laity needs to be vigilant and be able to spot the early signals when things could be going wrong. The first place these signals show up is at Mass.
 
Hi again,

I do think you are overreacting in a posture only situation, but it is perfectly understandable after your experience. How terrible for you, and your fellow parishioners.

And you are certainly prudent to be watchful for any signs of similar behavior.

I still do not think a request to stand is totally unacceptable, and I would not even question it, if there were no other questionable instructions.

Lux
 
Hi again,

I do think you are overreacting in a posture only situation, but it is perfectly understandable after your experience. How terrible for you, and your fellow parishioners.

And you are certainly prudent to be watchful for any signs of similar behavior.

I still do not think a request to stand is totally unacceptable, and I would not even question it, if there were no other questionable instructions.

Lux
In the big picture you are right. In the big picture all that matters is that we have the right answer to the question Jesus asked Peter. Do you love me? It does not matter if you stand on your head, how you cross yourself or if, whether you fast or don’t, or a parish maintains uniformity of posture, or anything much else.

One of the things I like about the Church, the bride of Christ, is the connectedness I feel with all the saints and Christians of the past. We are one body, not simply one with those who are alive now, but one with those who came before us. We believe in the communion of the saints. Love conquers death. Love is more powerful than the grave. The love of God is our salvation, but also the glue that holds us all together. We are connected spirtually in this love and can never be separated.

When we read about the imagery of heaven we get a sense of this unity. All the saints adore God and sing holy holy holy, with one voice. When He returns every knee bows and tongue confesses. They cast down their golden crowns, they bow before Him and cry out with one vocie and give Him glory. We are one, but all different. The picture I get is analagous to a big orchestra. All the instruments are in tune and play different parts to make a magnificent glorious symphony.

In a way Mass is like that. We gather together and He comes befroe us and we sing the praise of God with one voice. We kneel and stand and acclaim Him who is really with us in Sacrament. This is not a rehearsal for heaven. There is one Church. There is not one here and another one in heaven. We are together with all of those who came before us, at Mass especially. The Church one earth is joined to the Church in Heaven, one, and with one voice we proclaim God’s glory. The glorified Church in heaven may sing more gloriously seeing God face to face, but our voices are added to theirs. We worship the same person who is before us on the altar of sacrifice, in the hands of the priest. We behold Him who becomes our food and we are surrounded by the heavenly host.

The saints in heaven were once like us here on earth. They went through the same struggles and the love us and pray for us willing our good. One of the reasons I do not like changes in the form of worship is that it breaks continuity with the past. It seems to disconnect us, in a way. We Catholics believe the same things our predecessors believed, but we also are connected to them by what we do, or how we do it. Our voices echo the same prayers and hymns across the centuries. We do not sing with our mouths only with one voice, but with one heart. We give praise and glory with one voice and heart.

So is this important? Is it important how we do this? This is where the idea of uniformity of posture comes from, but also the unity is in the words. The uniformity is much greater than what takes place in the local parish according to the whim of the local priest and his peculiar quirks and notions of how it ought to be done. The local parish is part of the bigger choir to which it is united all over the world echoing God’s praise and worship around the globe and stretching across time. We sing with Saint Francis, and Padre Pio, and Dominic and Aquinas and Catherine, Peter and Paul and John, Agnes and Lucy, all with one voice.

When someone decides to impose his own tune he puts the one voice out of tune, into disharmony. It creates a clash.

This is how I see the big picture. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe none of it matters. Each local parish can do its own thing according to the dictates of its priest or celebrant and that does not matter.

I have a priest friend who was asked to say Mass at a parish where the regular priest was away for about a month. At that parish their priest had instructed people to do it his way. There were a couple of practices that were against the norms. The visiting priest refused to follow them, according to the style or variation the people were accustomed to. They became very upset with him. It was their parish after all. Who was he to tell them how to worship in their church?

So why is it that doing something so simple as following the universal norm, keeing harmony, becomes so difficult? What is it that makes a certain priest insistent that the people do it his way? Whether the issue is major or minor why do some local priests insist on being mavericks and singing their own tune? And why do others say we should sing with the universal choir?
 
Which violates the instructions in the GIRM. The USCCB 2005 edition, #43, ends with:

Litugicam Authenticam and Redemtoris Sacramentum provide that you have the duty to complain after to the priest or his bishop. They do not provide permission to ignore the priest’s instructions on posture during the mass.
I really enjoy this thread. We’re getting to view the topic from all kinds of angles and perspectives.

It could be mentioned at this point that it is actually the Bishops who effectively decide whether we kneel during the consecration …not the priest; in accord with # 43 of the GIRM.

At the following link cuf.org/FaithFacts/details_view.asp?ffID=88 it is stated that in both 1969 and 1995 the US Bishops, with Vatican approval,"…decreed as a norm that people are to ‘kneel after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic prayer.’ "

I found the article to be an interesting read. Here are two of several reasons they give for kneeling during the consecration:
Code:
 *This is why our bishops have decided that the faithful must kneel during the consecration. Kneeling or lying prostrate is traditionally associated with the most solemn form of worship. For example, St. Paul writes “that at Jesus’ name every knee must bend in the heavens, on the earth, and under the earth. . .” (Phil. 2:10).

  But the best example from Scripture is St. John’s description of how heavenly creatures pay tribute to Jesus (the Paschal Lamb who was slain) while participating in the heavenly liturgy, that is, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as experienced in heaven. Whenever glory and honor is given to the Lamb, the elders “fall down. . .and worship Him who lives forever and ever” (Rev. 4:9-11 and 5:11-14). St. John himself fell down as if he were dead upon encountering the risen Christ (Rev. 1:12-18).*
This article from EWTN labels the tendency to not kneel during the consecration as “disdain.” : ewtn.com/library/LITURGY/KNEELING.TXT

Here is an excerpt from the Vatican II Document on the authority of Bishops, “Christus Dominus.” :

CHAPTER I

THE RELATIONSHIP OF BISHOPS TO THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH

I. The Role of the Bishops in the Universal Church
  1. By virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members of the college, bishops are constituted as members of the episcopal body.(1) “The order of bishops is the successor to the college of the apostles in teaching and pastoral direction, or rather, in the episcopal order, the apostolic body continues without a break. Together with its head, the Roman pontiff, and never without this head it exists as the subject of **supreme, plenary power **over the universal Church. But this power cannot be exercised except with the agreement of the Roman pontiff.”…
So there we have it. The highest degree of obedience, of collegiality and of unity is the authority of the Bishops in union with Rome.

So section 43 of the GIRM says according to the links posted above that the Bishops decide whether we kneel during the consecration. Section 43 also says according to an earlier post by Aramis that, "…Originally Posted by USCCB
With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions which the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal
" Whatever is in the Missal, is what has been agreed upon by the Bishops in union with Rome:
  • At the beginning of Eucharistic Prayer I (Roman Canon),after the Sanctus it says kneel.
  • At the beginning of Eucharistic Prayer II,after the Sanctus it says kneel.
  • At the beginning of Eucharistic Prayer III ,after the Sanctus it says** kneel**.
  • At the beginning of Eucharistic Prayer IV,after the Sanctus it says kneel.
[The four examples above are taken from the Missal published by SCEPTER PUBLISHERS INC., and MIDWEST THEOLOGICAL FORUM…"Published by the authority of the Bishop’s Committee on the Liturgy, National Conference of Bishops (United States of America) ; Third American Edition 1995]

So if someone were to tell me, “You have to obey the priest when he tells you to not kneel (or to stand) during the consecration”, before I ever were to do so, I would need the answer to (on this particular point, notwithsanding provision of "good reasons not to - such as health and accomodation of kneeling; also according to that same section # 43 of the GIRM) the following question:

Am I obeying the priest, or am I joining him in disobedience to our Bishops and their union with Rome ?

Our best model of authority and unity are the Bishops in union with Rome … not someone else who thinks they have a “better idea.”

Uniformity and unity are not the same thing. Unity is a gift of the Holy Spirit.
 
I
Our best model of authority and unity are the Bishops in union with Rome … not someone else who thinks they have a “better idea.”

Uniformity and unity are not the same thing. Unity is a gift of the Holy Spirit.
Thank you for an excellent treatment and your research.
 
Yes, I do agree—excellent points & research.

But let’s also remember not to throw out the baby with the bath water.

We are speaking of the celebration of Mass, and there should be no distractions, as far as possible. If someone has a problem, we are told how to respond—with charity outside of the celebration. We are not told to ignore the instructions of the celebrant. Our obligation to respect our priests definitely takes priority over posture.

Bishops rarely override their Pastors. I was just speaking to a friend who was just ordained a Deacon, and he was saying that a Pastor is to his Parish, what a Bishop is to his diocese. If the Pastor has a “good reason” to request standing, the Bishop will not question his judgement.

But anyone certainly may question or register a complaint. There may or may not be a response, but I doubt a Bishp will override a Pastor in this instance.

Lux
 
Yes, Bishops rarely override their Pastors - even in instances where priests do such things as invite the congregation to hold hands around the altar during Communion, or as in the past when evidence has surfaced of certain other abuses that Bishops have “swept under the rug”. This is precisely why I have to disagree that it is necessary for a Bishop to override a Pastor in order to prove that the priest’s instructions are not in line with Bishops in union with Rome.

NeedImprovement outlined a very compelling synopsis of how the U.S. Bishops, with Vatican approval and under just authority, have already decreed kneeling as the norm. Therefore, the burden is on the priest to adhere to this as it has already been established. A priest is not justified in ignoring this and thereby trying to place the burden back on the Bishop with the logic, “I’m still going to do it my own way, and until you overrule me I consider this to be correct.” That reminds me of an argument my little brother used to use with my parents when we were children where he would do something they disapproved of, and then tell them, “well you never told me I couldn’t do that.”

Our obligation to the authority of the Vatican definitely takes precedence over the instructions of our priests.
 
Grandfather’s posts #104 and 112 express my opinion better than I could write them. To expand, though:
Why is it that a priest or bishop wants you to go against Rome on such a small matter? If the only quirk is allowing the laity to not kneel for the consecration while there is a temporary lack of kneelers, that’s one thing, but when a bishop or priest forbids it, it raises a huge red flag, as Grandfather noted, because oftentimes, human nature makes us want others to join us in our disobedience/sin. We have a tendency to try to minimize the importance of rules that we don’t particularly like, so SOME of our priests and bishops who don’t want to follow certain rules, might be trying to make it seem as though they’re not rules, “they’re more like suggestions”. (“Pirates” reference, couldn’t resist). Not a given, but as Grandfather said, it certainly warrants a closer look at this priest.
So, it’s time to look for other problems, which might be actual abuses. Are the sacred vessels made of precious metals? Does the priest purify the vessels himself after Communion, or is it done by laity? Does the priest take liberties with the prayers of the Mass? Is it more important to follow his rules, than the stuff in GIRM? Does he try to make everyone hold hands during the Our Father? (A big no-no, according to someone in Rome a few years ago, I think it was Cdl Arinze).
IF you answer yes to quite a few of those questions, then: Does the priest agree with the Vatican on abortion? ESCR? contraceptives? married priests? and the big one: same sex marriage?
IF you answer no to these questions, then: how are the parish’s finances? How long has it been since there was an independent audit? Does the rectory computer crash a lot? IF you’re still answering my questions here, then don’t let your kids be altar servers, don’t let them work in the rectory, and keep a close eye on the behavior of the kids who do, whether it changes drastically for the worse. Please don’t gossip if you get to this paragraph, and I’m not trying to say that this is always the case, but whenever you have a priest or bishop who doesn’t want to go along with the rest of the Catholic Church, it’s time to ask what else he disagrees with, and why.

Maybe I’m overreacting, but maybe I’m helping one child to avoid what I went through with my own childhood pastor, and I decided long ago, which ‘wrong’ I’d rather be.:mad:

(FWIW, the hometown bishop still wants people to stand after Communion until after everyone has received. About half the people at daily Mass ignore that, and about a fourth or more, at Sunday Mass there. I’ve never heard the current pastor say anything one way or the other, when I’ve visited back home.)
 
its ok grandmama, i have just come back from the traditional mass actually. great to hear! i love the traditional mass (well i love mass…all masses, but this form for me personally… i dont know how to explain…everyone is different so its a god thing then that there are 2 forms of the one rite ((yes i have come across the ewtn mass (((love ewtn!))) isn’t that the type the pope says, i havnt watched a papal mass in a while)) ) - anyway
i agree with lux on the disobedient matter, since i too think do i do what i feel is right for me or do i do what everyone else (the community) feels is right… but at the same time, i think to myself, when pondering on lux’s point about community, think of the religious life - people when entering have to confrom themselves to that of the community, so??? stil not sure 🤷
kneelers! woohoo!!! 🙂

just read needimprovement’s comment: i am stil young and have not been in that situation as yet. i keep on saying the same thing without coming to a conclusion, since i am very adamant and i do feel that i have the right to kneel BUT just thinking about st faustina and her disobedience - i don’t really know the story, but from what i know, her priest/spiritual director was telling her 2 do one thing and she didnt listen since it was contrary to what she knew she should be doing (remember, she spoke to Our Lord directly and so presumed that what he tells her overrides what anyone else does…naturally) but our lord rebuked her for her lack of obedience! to me, this story is inspiring, and reminds me of the reading i heard today about humbling outrselves. the same goes for st padre pio who knew his stigmata was true, etc and accepted not being able to hear confessions and being confided to his cell for many years, all out of obedience to the Holy Father.
Basically, if we know think that we should kneel but the priest is telling us to sit/stand then should we obey? but then, i was taught, for example, to obey the 4th commandment of honouring our parents, execpt, obviously, if they command us to commit a sin, especially a mortal sin!
So… i’ll take a back seat now and continue to read what everyone else has to say so maybe sonn i will come to a conclusion as what to do.
Ave Maria
Welcome and come back often.
What year of schooling are you in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top