My bishop has recently mandated standing during the liturgy where I am not comfortable

  • Thread starter Thread starter docrock1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dovekin said:
The GIRM specifically says that the choice of posture should be made by the conference of bishops. Cardinal Arinze was not revoking that right. It is within that choice of norms that individuals may choose to kneel or sit.
Click to expand...
The GIRM, including the US adaptions, is a function of the CDWDS, and, under Canon 16, it is the final interpreter of what the law means.

That is why the USCCB submitted the dubium to Cardinal Arinze in the first place. To clarify what they themselves were unsure of.

I agree that there is nothing misguided in the action of the bishop. The only misguided action would be on the part of any who feel that the OP would be somehow out of line or even disobedient if they chose to kneel. It would also be misguided to presume that this bishop is trying to enforce a singular posture in opposition to Rome.

But the act of the bishop would not be.
 
These standing versus kneeling threads always cause contention.

(Nobody seems to worry about sitting as a third option because it’s assumed people have permanent or temporary good reasons to sit even if it’s not a proscribed position.)

When this general topic does come up, I wish we would be careful to differentiate between the different parts of the Mass for which the bishops’ conferences and local bishops are allowed by the various GIRMs to proscribe postures.

To me, it comes across as crazy when someone says their bishop told them to stand during the, “Lord I am not worthy,” and someone fires back, “Cardinal Arinze says we are allowed to kneel after communion.”

They are different parts of the Mass! 😖 The positions for the time before communion, the Communion procession, and the time for private prayer (after everyone is finished receiving communion) ought to be argued individually. 😩
 
Last edited:
Phemie said:
In Canada, the norm is the same as the universal norm, which is to kneel only from the end of the Sanctus until “The mystery of faith”, with the proviso that in parishes where it’s been the norm to kneel for the entire Eucharistic prayer and after “Behold the Lamb of God…” it is laudable to keep doing so. Individual bishops have mandated kneeling for the entire E.P. for their diocese and some pastors have done the same. Our former pastor asked us to kneel for all the E.P., this after not kneeling at all for about 15 years because the pastor back then had told us not to kneel. People were delighted to return to kneeling.
Click to expand...
Its interesting how it even varies within the same (ecclesiastical) province. In Vancouver, the faithful kneel throughout the entire Eucharistic Prayer, as in the US, and again after the Agnus Dei. I’m not sure if its mandated by the archbishop or simply custom, but its universal in every parish I can think of (including the cathedral). After receiving communion, people kneel or sit as they prefer, but I’ve never seen anyone stand after receiving. In most parishes the faithful receive standing, though at the cathedral and a number of other particular parishes, the option to receive kneeling is practiced as well.

Meanwhile, in the neigbhouring diocese of Nelson, where I was originally received into the Church (same province both ecclesiastically and civilly), the faithful kneel only for the first part of the EP until the end of the consecration, receive standing, and remain standing until all have received…

When I was living in the Dominican, only a minority knelt at all…most stood during the consecration. It can get confusing when you travel from place to place and you’re conditioned to a particular practice.
 
Last edited:
Do you kneel after the Agnus Dei ? I ask because it’s during that period of time that the Domine non sum dignum…occurs.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
I think given the state of most dioceses, bishops have bigger fish to fry and should go fry them.
Click to expand...
Much agreement on this. Micromanaging postures of the faithful should be the least of a bishop’s concerns.
 
I genuflect during the Creed. I don’t make a lavish production out of it and I don’t get in anyone else’s space or bump them. Nobody has ever said a word. I also cross myself at the end of the creed and bow toward the cross during processional and recessional. Who cares?
 
Last edited:
Did the Bishop mandate standing for after receving communion or did he mandate standing after the Lamb of God?

If the mandate is for after the Lamb of God, the Bishop is well within his rights to request that and he should be obeyed.
 
prayerrider said:
I genuflect during the Creed. I don’t make a lavish production out of it and I don’t get in anyone else’s space or bump them. Nobody has ever said a word. I also cross myself at the end of the creed and bow toward the cross during processional and recessional. Who cares?
Click to expand...
There are only two days a year where we are to genuflect during the Creed. The rest of the time we are supposed to bow deeply. I bow but I haven’t seen anyone else in my parish do so, although to be fair I sit pretty much in the front.
 
I don’t really much care what others do so long they don’t rough me, horse collar tackle me, chop block me or otherwise do anything that would incur a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down in a game.
But I’m not the postures police. I’m not the Mass fashion police either. 😂
 
Brendan said:
40.png
Dovekin:
The GIRM specifically says that the choice of posture should be made by the conference of bishops. Cardinal Arinze was not revoking that right. It is within that choice of norms that individuals may choose to kneel or sit.
Click to expand...
The GIRM, including the US adaptions, is a function of the CDWDS, and, under Canon 16, it is the final interpreter of what the law means.

That is why the USCCB submitted the dubium to Cardinal Arinze in the first place. To clarify what they themselves were unsure of.
Click to expand...
What was so weird about that was that it had taken them 27 years to notice that the posture from the end of the Consecration to the end of the Mass was standing. Nothing had changed between the 1975 and the 2002 GIRM as far as posture was concerned, not a thing, but suddenly it was on their radar and everyone was losing their minds.
 
The 1075 GIRM really did not say much about the posture of the people, only that they should kneel for the Consecration. After that, it was completely silent.

The rest was up to the local conference of bishops to adapt 'according to the customs of the people".
But it is up to the conference of bishops to adapt the actions and postures described in the Order of the Roman Mass to the customs of the people.[29] But the conference must make sure that such adaptations correspond to the meaning and character of each part of the celebration.
Click to expand...
Thus, in some areas, kneeling was done at the Agnus Dei until Communion, in others it was not.

The 2002 GIRM went into FAR more depth, hence why the Bishops requested clarification from Rome.

What was also interesting was that this part of the 1975 GIRM was incredibly ignored
Since the faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is desirable that they know how to sing at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the profession of faith and the Lord’s Prayer, set to simple melodies
Click to expand...
.[
 
Brendan said:
The 1075 GIRM really did not say much about the posture of the people, only that they should kneel for the Consecration. After that, it was completely silent.

The rest was up to the local conference of bishops to adapt 'according to the customs of the people".
But it is up to the conference of bishops to adapt the actions and postures described in the Order of the Roman Mass to the customs of the people.[29] But the conference must make sure that such adaptations correspond to the meaning and character of each part of the celebration.
Click to expand...
Actually, no. I have a copy of an American Sacramentary and article 21 of the 1975 GIRM was just as detailed in what postures were supposed to be (unless other provisions are made) as the 2002 and there were no changes in postures between one and the other.

The NCCB had agreed in 1969 to leave the postures unchanged with only one adaptation to article 21: kneeling would be from the end of the Sanctus to The Lord’s Prayer across the US.

In the late 1990s, that was changed so that each bishop was allowed to decide for his own diocese whether to kneel throughout the E.P. or stand after Consecration. That permission was later rescinded when the 2002 GIRM was promulgated and the entire US returned to kneeling for all the E.P.
Click to expand...
 
Phemie said:
The option is for silence or a community-sung hymn, not silence or listening to a rendition by the choir or a soloist.
Click to expand...
That (choir only) is exactly what has happened in my parish for decades.

When I first joined the Catholic church in the '80s, after communion there’d usually be a traditional eucharistic hymn (particularly Soul of My Saviour) sung by the congregation. As often as not it was a capella, so with or without musicians there’d usually be at least one hymn during the service. I fell in love with it!

Over the years Soul of my Saviour seemed to fell out of favour in suburban parishes, and music became dominated by choirs and their own choice of music, which was typically post 1970s. I once asked a choir leader if we could have a eucharistic hymn at communion time, and she just giggled “Like Soul of My Saviour?”.

My current parish has been like that for more than twenty years, with the communion hymn being an “arty” (albeit reverential and contemplative) performance by the choir.

I’ve been in the choir myself now for eight years, and a few years ago became aware, through CAF, of the principle that the communion hymn is to have a eucharistic and/or community theme, and is to be sung by the congregation.

Along the way, I also learned that our choir leader strongly prefers communion time as a “choir moment” and also strongly believes that this is best practice, liturgically.

A priest asked the choir leader to please stop the choir “performance” at communion and have a congregational hymn, and she demurred. Not resolutely, but enough to push him to have to overrule her if he really wanted it, which he declined to do. I’m quite sure he knows either the GIRM or the general pincipal, but he thought it best not to impose it.

I’ve also learned from being in the choir what a sacrifice it is for all members, especially the leader and organist, that everyone is doing their best for the parish, and that our parish is fortunate to have the music it does - many are worse off.

That’s how parish politics works. Even a clear mandate such as GIRM 88 has to take a second place to “what works”. But for myself, being aware of it now (GIRM 88), if there ever comes a time when I can influence the selection of communion hymn, I know what the Church expects.

Thanks for the citation!
 
Last edited:
As others have said, obedience is important. Personally I’d do as I’m asked to do by the bishop, bow my head reverently and take comfort in the verse ‘When you stand to pray, forgive anyone against whom you have a grievance, so that your heavenly Father may in turn forgive you your transgressions.’ ~Mark 11:25
 
The Communion hymn can be a choir alone piece. It’s one of the options given by GIRM 87. It’s the post-Communion “reflection” hymn, that occurs in some parishes, that the GIRM says is to be sung by the community.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top