MERGED: Should I stay kneeling?/Parish practices

[ConstantineTG]

It predated Roman culture in Church history. Psalm 95:6 for example.

But thats Jewish. If that were true, then Eastern Churches who predated the Roman Church would kneel as well. They don’t

It would be a stretch to say that David was a Roman

With all his wives and all the wives of Solomon, I wouldn’t be surprised if he turns out to be an ancestor of the Roman Emperors

 

[ConstantineTG]

Well, hopefully you also do not have the authority to sign a bill that will send us into spending oblivion. One of them is capable of enough damage for all of us!

If it makes you feel better, I’m in Canada So no matter what authority I possess, it won’t affect Americans

 

[FNDRB58]

See my post - I am neither irrational nor denying anything. My discussion was limited to two areas - Agnus Dei to Communion, and during communion after receiving.

You are confusing Unit with Uniformity. The Church - which includes the Romen rite but is not exclusive to it - requires unity. It does not require uniformity, and never has. There is no “disunity” between bishops where options are made available - as they are on the issue of standing/kneeling during the Agnus Dei period. There may not be uniformity, but it is a misunderstanding of what the Church requires or doesn’t require. Most people, prior to the start of the OF, were only familiar with the EF which from their understanding and experience, was uniform. Given that there were (and still are) several small rites within the jurisdiction of the Roman rite, and some minor issues (primarily elsewhere in the world) in the EF, that (uniformity) was not factual (and in face, given the eastern rites, was not factual, given their different liturgies). But most people were entirely unaware of this, and as a result assumed that unity meant uniformity. It didn’t; it doesn’t, and it causes some people consternation. Why, I don’t know. When I first learned of such issues, my reaction was “Oh. That’s interesting.” Others seem to be somewhere between confused and horrified that the Church does not require, and in fact seems comfortable with, a lack of complete uniformity.

the bishop does not have carte blanche authority to determine how the liturgy will be celebrated; he is to follow the GIRM with the exceptions as to where there are alternates and/or options.

The fact that a few bishops do not follow the GIRM, or at least do not require their pastors to follow it is well known. By now, one can reasonably assume that Rome also knows it, and Rome has not made any public effort to correct some of the more notorious ones.

Actually, the GIRM was written in such a way that it appeared that all were to remain standing after receiving until the last had received; this was the source of the dubium to which (I believe it was) Arinze responded that Rome did not intend to be that rigid about posture (and there is another example of Rome not demanding uniformity in all things).

This has been asked and answered throughout the thread, with quotes to the GIRM by others. The bishop is not overruling anything. The GIRM specifically gives the bishop and option; exercising an option is not overruling the GIRM, not even “so to speak”.

I don’t understand the point you are making by your last two paragraphs when I haven’t even had an issue with the GIRM on returning to the pews after communion. I have said I acknowledge the fact that we have the option. I have only asserted that it is most proper to remain kneeling while the Blessed Sacrament is exposed.

Ok, the spin stops here.

If you are going to get nit-picky about the differences between unity and uniformity then you are clearly missing my point. But I think you knew my point. Whether we call it one or the other the nucleus is that all do one thing. The local bishop and parish priest expect all in the church to do one thing and yet all the bishops and priests are not doing one thing. I don’t care what they are authorized to do or not do. It is frustrating when one goes to one church and are used to adoring the Blessed Sacrament by kneeling which is the preferred method according to the GIRM but then go to another church and everybody is standing according to the option also given by the GIRM. In most of the parishes in the Diocese of San Jose, parishioners are all standing even for the consecration! So I truly don’t think they nor the priest who apparently are instructing them know what they are doing or perhaps they do and don’t care. I wonder what the real reason is why a cleric would prefer standing over kneeling. What is being accomplished by raising someone off their knees before the Lord? What is to be gained?

I am currently in dialogue with Father Serpa on this matter and you will be interested to read his comments. I will try to post them soon after I get something clarified. Needless to say he feels kneeling ater the Agnus Dei is the most appropriate posture. He also indicated that the Eastern Rite Catholics stand but the Tabernacle is behind a large partition of sorts. They don’t show adoration until they receive communion.

 

[otjm]

If it makes you feel better, I’m in Canada So no matter what authority I possess, it won’t affect Americans

Ah, yes, we have much to learn from Canada. Like how tax rates integrate with socialized medicine.

I think our learning curve just turned up…

 

[ConstantineTG]

Ah, yes, we have much to learn from Canada. Like how tax rates integrate with socialized medicine.

I think our learning curve just turned up…

I can quickly tell you that for the same item, its always more expensive in Canada. Sure, we get (mostly, not entirely) free healthcare but pay more for almost everything. Thats why border lineups during weekends is crazy. And more than half of the cars in outlet malls have Canadian plates

Anyway, apologies to everyone else, we’re getting off-topic here. Promise this is my last post on this

 

[5Loaves]

Hi all-
I hope you can give me some advice about the Eucharist and when to kneel/stand.
In our parish, everyone kneels during Consecration, and then stands up to sing “Amen” while the host is still being raised. In other parishes I’ve been too, everyone remains kneeling until it’s time to begin Communion. I’ve seen some older folks remain kneeling, but I don’t want to be the odd man out.

GIRM 43. §3 In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should **kneel **beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer,

We had two priests assigned to us short term who made a point of reviewing with us posture and the GIRM among other very useful and well done teachings. They had every one kneeling until after the so called “great” Amen. **Within 4 months most of the parish was standing again **once singing the Amen was begun. Why? In my opinion it’s because the *cantor *makes a dramatic gesture, lifting one or both arms upward. If that gesture done that way doesn’t say “arise!” I’ll eat my GIRM. The priest who was later permanently assigned to the parish apparently has bigger fish to fry because he’s never spoken about posture at all.

Also, after I receive Communion, I would love to go back to my seat and kneel in prayer, but I was told in RCIA that "at our parish we all stand until everyone has received Communion as a show of community." So, once again, I’d be the weird one kneeling while everyone else is being “a community.”
What to do??
Thanks,
Angela

As others have already said the GIRM 43 says "and, as circumstances allow, they may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed. "

In Let Us Pray: A Guide to the Rubrics of the Sunday Mass author Father Paul Turner, Doctor of Sacred Theology, says “Many people assume the Communion ends when the tabernacle door is shut or when the priest sits down, but Communion ends when the last person has received.” (P751) “The CDWDS* attempted to clarity the matter in a later statement permitting these devotional postures after each person receives Communion. The intent of GIRM 43 is 'on the one hand, the ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, not to regulate posture rigidly in such a was that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free” Prot.N.855/03/L). However, this did not eliminate the posture the GIRM had in mind all along, namely, standing. The documents, therefore, permit three different posture after receiving Communion." (P748)

*CDWDS Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

 

[otjm]

GIRM 43. §3 In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should **kneel **beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer,

We had two priests assigned to us short term who made a point of reviewing with us posture and the GIRM among other very useful and well done teachings. They had every one kneeling until after the so called “great” Amen. **Within 4 months most of the parish was standing again **once singing the Amen was begun. Why? In my opinion it’s because the *cantor *makes a dramatic gesture, lifting one or both arms upward. If that gesture done that way doesn’t say “arise!” I’ll eat my GIRM. The priest who was later permanently assigned to the parish apparently has bigger fish to fry because he’s never spoken about posture at all.

As others have already said the GIRM 43 says "and, as circumstances allow, they may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed. "

In Let Us Pray: A Guide to the Rubrics of the Sunday Mass author Father Paul Turner, Doctor of Sacred Theology, says “Many people assume the Communion ends when the tabernacle door is shut or when the priest sits down, but Communion ends when the last person has received.” (P751) “The CDWDS* attempted to clarity the matter in a later statement permitting these devotional postures after each person receives Communion. The intent of GIRM 43 is 'on the one hand, the ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, not to regulate posture rigidly in such a was that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free” Prot.N.855/03/L). However, this did not eliminate the posture the GIRM had in mind all along, namely, standing. The documents, therefore, permit three different posture after receiving Communion." (P748)

*CDWDS Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

Thanks for the notations.

 

[Waiting]

Hi all-
I hope you can give me some advice about the Eucharist and when to kneel/stand.
In our parish, everyone kneels during Consecration, and then stands up to sing “Amen” while the host is still being raised. In other parishes I’ve been too, everyone remains kneeling until it’s time to begin Communion. I’ve seen some older folks remain kneeling, but I don’t want to be the odd man out.
Also, after I receive Communion, I would love to go back to my seat and kneel in prayer, but I was told in RCIA that “at our parish we all stand until everyone has received Communion as a show of community.” So, once again, I’d be the weird one kneeling while everyone else is being “a community.”
What to do??
Thanks,
Angela

 

[Aramis]

I’ve read that the reason why Eastern Catholics stand for most or all of their liturgy is because standing is the posture of the Ressurection, that is why they only stand during Sundays.

Actually, it’s because the 1st ecumenical council instructed that all prayers to the Lord should be offered standing on Sundays and from pascha (easter) to pentecost.

Many Byzantine rite variations have prostrations during the weekday liturgies… kneeling is a latinization, except during the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts… and that’s used only during fasts.

 

[Aramis]

He also indicated that the Eastern Rite Catholics stand but the Tabernacle is behind a large partition of sorts.

only true for the Byzantine Churches (all 14) and the Coptic church. The Armenians, Syrians, Chaldeans, Maronites, Syro-Malabar, and Syro-Malankar do not have any such screens, but may have a curtain. The screen is called an Iconostas. I’m not certain about the Ethiopians; half of the Ethiopian Church’s parishes use the Roman Mass, anyway, and a small portion use the Eritrean…

But, aside from those Ethiopian parishes using the Roman Rite, the tradition is to stand throughout the liturgy on Sundays… because the 1st Ecumenical Council said we must. As a sign of unity.

They don’t show adoration until they receive communion.

We Byzantines also never expose the blessed sacrament, don’t have eucharistic adoration as a separate service (except in REALLY badly latinized parishes), receive communion standing, use leavened bread, may have more books in our bibles, and all baptisms are followed immediately with confirmation and 1st communion. Infants receive communion regularly.

We do bow and cross ourselves as we approach. If we are not too far forward of it, we also reverence the festal icon on the tetrapod en route.

In those parishes which do permit sitting, it’s only during the deacon’s litanies, a couple of introductory hymns, the troparia, kontakia, prokeimenon, and the epistle, and while the deacon or priest purificates the chalice.

 

[Natuiojimen]

UnfortunatelyRS Gold, a much simpler and more lucrative reason for the (WOW Gold)attack on these targets is to extract simple, the target organizations and companies. Online(Buy WOW Gold) Poker Company discovered that in the first half of this century as they were threatened with having their sites shut down by the introduction of distributed denial-of-service attacks if a ransom was paid. As bandwidth has increased and the use of content delivery services has continued to spread, these types of network attacks saturating become more difficult, although not impossible to perform. Unfortunately, rather than deter attackers, Kaufen WOW Gold just different approaches used. First, infiltrated an organization and then held them hostage critical resourcesWOW Gold sale.

 

[FNDRB58]

only true for the Byzantine Churches (all 14) and the Coptic church. The Armenians, Syrians, Chaldeans, Maronites, Syro-Malabar, and Syro-Malankar do not have any such screens, but may have a curtain. The screen is called an Iconostas. I’m not certain about the Ethiopians; half of the Ethiopian Church’s parishes use the Roman Mass, anyway, and a small portion use the Eritrean…

But, aside from those Ethiopian parishes using the Roman Rite, the tradition is to stand throughout the liturgy on Sundays… because the 1st Ecumenical Council said we must. As a sign of unity.

We Byzantines also never expose the blessed sacrament, don’t have eucharistic adoration as a separate service (except in REALLY badly latinized parishes), receive communion standing, use leavened bread, may have more books in our bibles, and all baptisms are followed immediately with confirmation and 1st communion. Infants receive communion regularly.

We do bow and cross ourselves as we approach. If we are not too far forward of it, we also reverence the festal icon on the tetrapod en route.

In those parishes which do permit sitting, it’s only during the deacon’s litanies, a couple of introductory hymns, the troparia, kontakia, prokeimenon, and the epistle, and while the deacon or priest purificates the chalice.

I didn’t say screens per say, I said that Father Serpa said “partitions” which includes screens, curtains or anything that separates the Eucharist from being visible.

 

[otjm]

I don’t understand the point you are making by your last two paragraphs when I haven’t even had an issue with the GIRM on returning to the pews after communion. I have said I acknowledge the fact that we have the option. I have only asserted that it is most proper to remain kneeling while the Blessed Sacrament is exposed.

Ok, the spin stops here.

If you are going to get nit-picky about the differences between unity and uniformity then you are clearly missing my point. But I think you knew my point. Whether we call it one or the other the nucleus is that all do one thing. The local bishop and parish priest expect all in the church to do one thing and yet all the bishops and priests are not doing one thing. I don’t care what they are authorized to do or not do. It is frustrating when one goes to one church and are used to adoring the Blessed Sacrament by kneeling which is the preferred method according to the GIRM but then go to another church and everybody is standing according to the option also given by the GIRM. In most of the parishes in the Diocese of San Jose, parishioners are all standing even for the consecration! So I truly don’t think they nor the priest who apparently are instructing them know what they are doing or perhaps they do and don’t care. I wonder what the real reason is why a cleric would prefer standing over kneeling. What is being accomplished by raising someone off their knees before the Lord? What is to be gained?

I am currently in dialogue with Father Serpa on this matter and you will be interested to read his comments. I will try to post them soon after I get something clarified. Needless to say he feels kneeling ater the Agnus Dei is the most appropriate posture. He also indicated that the Eastern Rite Catholics stand but the Tabernacle is behind a large partition of sorts. They don’t show adoration until they receive communion.

I was in college before Vatican 2 ended, so I can understand how people are affected by change, and how feelings develop about posture. I am not trying to make light of it. I get the point about feeling awkward, I get the feeling about consistency.

One of the problems we have had is that our exposure tot he Church has been, for the extreme part, limited only to the Roman rite; and for those of us who were exposed to that prior to Vatican 2, we grew up with the impression that what was disciplinary was doctrinal; that is, the Mass was said a certain way, our postures were specific and uniform, and that was simply “the way it is”.

What many people do not know or else understand, and what some who know don’t want to accept, is that a) the bishop, within the guidelines set forth by Rome, has authority over the liturgy; b) Rome has the authority and has exercised that authority, to give a certain amount of discretion within the rules of the Mass (as set forth in the GIRM) to the bishop as head of the liturgy in his diocese, and the bishops have exercised that authority. The US in fact kneels more than the universal law indicates (during and after the Consecration). that was, in fact, requested by the bishops of the US. and within the discretion given, there have been norms set within the US that vary from the universal norm.

I am also aware that not all bishops “do the red and say the black”; and that others, who may personally do so, do not enforce that within their dioceses. Rome is also aware of that. This causes confusion further, to those who assume that unity means uniformity, and to those who don’t want to change from what “used to be” the rules.

Long ago I was acquainted with the rule “when in Rome, do what the Romans do”. I try to keep that in mind in most situations. I have been in only one or two parishes that stood during the Consecration. I stood. At that point, I did not feel it was my duty to instruct on liturgical rules, and further, it is my humble opinion that by kneeling I would be calling undue attention to myself. Did I want to kneel? Yes. Did I feel kneeling was correct? Yes. Did I think that kneeling was giving more honor to God than standing? In general, yes, but it was not for me to judge the thoughts of others.

On the other hand, as a child (male) I was taught that I was to stand, as a sign of honor, when adults came into the room; so standing was also a sign of honor (and as an aside, it would appear to be a very strong sign within the Church, as in, within the Eastern rites).

I can understand that there is confusion sown within several parishes in a diocese where posture varies from parish to parish. Essentially, there is nothing I can do about that, other than to determine where I may go to Mass, and where I might avoid going if possible.

Rome does not micromanage the Church, and although we may thing it did so 60 years ago, I can assure you, it did not. Neither do the bishops micromanage their parishes. We can all wish they did, but they have other fish to fry, have had, and most likely will have in the future.

Some people are much more sensitive to posture, or to what they think the posture should be, than I am. I try to keep my focus on where I am and why I am there, and let the posture flow. That is not to be a criticism of those who feel strongly about the issue. If it bothers someone, I am not going to tell them to “get over it”. Feelings run deep and are not easily changed.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I agree, and was raised the exact same way.

What I won’t do is handle the Eucharist. The standing/kneeling doesn’t seem to effect me. But I do feel its wrong to handle the Eucharist and can’t bring myself to do so. Leaned behavior maybe. but I get a distinct feeling its wrong.

 

[otjm]

I agree, and was raised the exact same way.

What I won’t do is handle the Eucharist. The standing/kneeling doesn’t seem to effect me. But I do feel its wrong to handle the Eucharist and can’t bring myself to do so. Leaned behavior maybe. but I get a distinct feeling its wrong.

The universal norm for the Roman rite is on the tongue.

On the other hand, I have read that reception in the hand has been in at least one of the Eastern rites since time immemorial (whether true or not, I can’t confirm). It appears in the Roman rite up to the 10th century at least, and is arguably the way that Christ gave the Eucharist to the Apostles, and how they continued on. One is not required to receive that way (in the hand). I have heard from some people who feel that it is a tremendous privilege to receive in the hand. The discussion (and speculation) is all over the board.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The universal norm for the Roman rite is on the tongue.

On the other hand, I have read that reception in the hand has been in at least one of the Eastern rites since time immemorial (whether true or not, I can’t confirm). It appears in the Roman rite up to the 10th century at least, and is arguably the way that Christ gave the Eucharist to the Apostles, and how they continued on. One is not required to receive that way (in the hand). I have heard from some people who feel that it is a tremendous privilege to receive in the hand. The discussion (and speculation) is all over the board.

Chaldeans. And I heard Coptics. I’ve never been to a Coptic Mass. But during the Chaldean Holy Qurbana, a table is brought out before distribution of Communion and the incense is placed on the table. This is between the Communion lines. People would purify their hands on the incense before receiving the Precious Body of Christ on their hands.

 

[stormy99]

Our parish remains standing through communion or you can kneel…no one sits down that can stand or kneel until it is over…then all sit. After communion, I kneel until I am ready to stand up…

stormy

 

[FNDRB58]

I was in college before Vatican 2 ended, so I can understand how people are affected by change, and how feelings develop about posture. I am not trying to make light of it. I get the point about feeling awkward, I get the feeling about consistency.

One of the problems we have had is that our exposure tot he Church has been, for the extreme part, limited only to the Roman rite; and for those of us who were exposed to that prior to Vatican 2, we grew up with the impression that what was disciplinary was doctrinal; that is, the Mass was said a certain way, our postures were specific and uniform, and that was simply “the way it is”.

What many people do not know or else understand, and what some who know don’t want to accept, is that a) the bishop, within the guidelines set forth by Rome, has authority over the liturgy; b) Rome has the authority and has exercised that authority, to give a certain amount of discretion within the rules of the Mass (as set forth in the GIRM) to the bishop as head of the liturgy in his diocese, and the bishops have exercised that authority. The US in fact kneels more than the universal law indicates (during and after the Consecration). that was, in fact, requested by the bishops of the US. and within the discretion given, there have been norms set within the US that vary from the universal norm.

I am also aware that not all bishops “do the red and say the black”; and that others, who may personally do so, do not enforce that within their dioceses. Rome is also aware of that. This causes confusion further, to those who assume that unity means uniformity, and to those who don’t want to change from what “used to be” the rules.

Long ago I was acquainted with the rule “when in Rome, do what the Romans do”. I try to keep that in mind in most situations. I have been in only one or two parishes that stood during the Consecration. I stood. At that point, I did not feel it was my duty to instruct on liturgical rules, and further, it is my humble opinion that by kneeling I would be calling undue attention to myself. Did I want to kneel? Yes. Did I feel kneeling was correct? Yes. Did I think that kneeling was giving more honor to God than standing? In general, yes, but it was not for me to judge the thoughts of others.

On the other hand, as a child (male) I was taught that I was to stand, as a sign of honor, when adults came into the room; so standing was also a sign of honor (and as an aside, it would appear to be a very strong sign within the Church, as in, within the Eastern rites).

I can understand that there is confusion sown within several parishes in a diocese where posture varies from parish to parish. Essentially, there is nothing I can do about that, other than to determine where I may go to Mass, and where I might avoid going if possible.

Rome does not micromanage the Church, and although we may thing it did so 60 years ago, I can assure you, it did not. Neither do the bishops micromanage their parishes. We can all wish they did, but they have other fish to fry, have had, and most likely will have in the future.

Some people are much more sensitive to posture, or to what they think the posture should be, than I am. I try to keep my focus on where I am and why I am there, and let the posture flow. That is not to be a criticism of those who feel strongly about the issue. If it bothers someone, I am not going to tell them to “get over it”. Feelings run deep and are not easily changed.

“Going with the flow” is appropriate while doing the wave at a football game or driving your car a certain speed on the freeway. “Going with the flow” is a dangerous motto in matters of religion, especially in how to worship our Savior Jesus Christ. Standing out of the crowd for what you believe in is a good thing. There were many who gave their lives because they weren’t afraid of “standing out”.

The GIRM states that all who are able MUST kneel during the Consecration…period. The Pope has given them authorization to do so and the U.S. Bishops have made this law. Any bishop or priest straying from this is doing so illicitly. They have no right to do so and I would not return to that parish.

The Transubstantiation is one of the greatest mysteries we have. Words can’t fully describe it or explain it; bread into the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, God made Man! Kneeling is a sign of penance but also is a sign of humility and adoration. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ suffered torture and was crucified and died on the cross and He did it for us! Who of you would remain standing if our Savior or our Blessed Mother for that matter appeared before us during Mass in human bodily form? If you weren’t in shock and still had your wits about you, wouldn’t you kneel? It could be the Second Coming for all you know! Please explain to me how you could believe in the Passion of Christ and worship and praise your Savior every day of your life and remain standing if He entered your church. Well…He did…He is there! The Real Presence of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is present before us in our places of worship! There is no difference.

Someone please explain why standing during the Consecration is appropriate? Please explain to me what is in your heart that would preclude you from bending your knee joints and lowering yourself before your Creator?

 

[Aramis]

Someone please explain why standing during the Consecration is appropriate? Please explain to me what is in your heart that would preclude you from bending your knee joints and lowering yourself before your Creator?

Because the 1st Ecumenical Council defined it as such.

If it’s from Easter to Pentecost, because I am a Byzantine, and it’s forbidden for me to kneel for any religious reason during that time. (Again, 1st EC.)

 

[otjm]

“Going with the flow” is appropriate while doing the wave at a football game or driving your car a certain speed on the freeway. “Going with the flow” is a dangerous motto in matters of religion, especially in how to worship our Savior Jesus Christ. Standing out of the crowd for what you believe in is a good thing. There were many who gave their lives because they weren’t afraid of “standing out”.

I would agree that “going with the flow” can be dangerous if one is not anchored in what the proper posture is. However, if you read what I said in the whole of my comments, I don’t make a point of going to Mass in parishes that violate the GIRM. On the rare occasion that I am in one that stands during the Consecration, I stand.

Why? In what little experience I have accumulated, and whatever wisdom there may be in it, I have found that going against the flow is beyond non-productive, it is counter productive in issues such as posture at Mass. In the range of issues I try to deal with constructively with others, I have found that I have no impact whatsoever on issues concerning this. I most certainly would not correct you if you and I were attending Mass where they all stood, and you knelt. I am going to spend what effort I make on something I might possibly have impact on, and this is not one of them. Further, I can count in very very low numbers the Masses I have attended where this specific has happened, and I have made a point in not repeating that.

The GIRM states that all who are able MUST kneel during the Consecration…period. The Pope has given them authorization to do so and the U.S. Bishops have made this law. Any bishop or priest straying from this is doing so illicitly. They have no right to do so and I would not return to that parish.

I can read, and have read the GIRM more than once or twice. I also make a point of not returning. I would also point out that Rome has been inundated with letters over the last 40 years about abuses in the Liturgy; they have responded with several directives and a very rare occasion if direct intervention. However, in the whole, they simply ignore the matter. In short, it is far more important to you than to them. another way of saying it is yes, it is illicit, and they make little or no effort on a parish by parish basis, nor even a diocese by diocese basis.

The Transubstantiation is one of the greatest mysteries we have. Words can’t fully describe it or explain it; bread into the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, God made Man! Kneeling is a sign of penance but also is a sign of humility and adoration. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ suffered torture and was crucified and died on the cross and He did it for us! Who of you would remain standing if our Savior or our Blessed Mother for that matter appeared before us during Mass in human bodily form? If you weren’t in shock and still had your wits about you, wouldn’t you kneel? It could be the Second Coming for all you know! Please explain to me how you could believe in the Passion of Christ and worship and praise your Savior every day of your life and remain standing if He entered your church. Well…He did…He is there! The Real Presence of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is present before us in our places of worship! There is no difference.

In the Roman rite, kneeling is a sign of adoration. In the Eastern rites, standing is. Go easy; this is far more a cultural issue than a universal issue.

Someone please explain why standing during the Consecration is appropriate? Please explain to me what is in your heart that would preclude you from bending your knee joints and lowering yourself before your Creator?

As I noted, it is a cultural issue. Those who have adopted standing in the Roman rite are going cross-cultural, which makes little or no sense.

On the other hand, standing is also a sign of respect in Western culture (or at least it was, when there was such a thing as respect within the culture in general; much respect and manners has been lost.

This is obviously something you are very sensitive to, and I am not trying to make light of that, nor to indicate that your sensitivity is wrong. I am sensitive to certain issues; I am neither ignorant of this issue, nor in any way indicating that I think it is ok, permissible, of no meaning, or irrelevant. What I have found is that those parishes where this occurs have far, far greater issues at play (that is, seriously wrong) than this issue; this is a minor blip compared to some of the issues at play in those parishes. What is afoot in them is far more than a simple wrong-headedness, or simply being stiff-necked about the GIRM. In time, the issue will resolve itself. In the meanwhile, I spend my efforts elsewhere.

And if Christ were to appear, I don’t honestly know what posture I would take. The Apostles stood, sat, reclined, laid down and slept, walked, and probably ran in His presence (and given the probably age of the youngest of them, possibly even jumped up and down). I have done 24 hour Perpetual Adoration, and I have knelt, stood (back pain), sat, an on a rare occasion, fallen asleep.