A
AndyP2014
Guest
Due to the design of the pews and kneelers in my parish church and my height and fatness, I find the use of our kneelers torturous. I find the floor much more comfortable.
- Status
O
otjm
Guest
That has absolutely and completely nothing whatsoever to do with modernism, a matter starting in the 1850’s. It may sound quite informed and sophisticated to say, but has no relevance to the discussion.
One should read the GIRM before firing off an answer.
GIRM # 43: “In the Dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause. However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God) unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.”
As the rule from Rome indicates that we should kneel, and sets out exceptions, it is totally uncalled for to call standing “modernism”.
The parish may be wrong to not have kneelers, which is a matter for the bishop to determine; and if the bishop determines that it is permissible in this parish to not have kneelers, then standing is appropriate.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Maybe you and I are looking at different parts of what EWTN wrote? I was objecting to the previous poster’s implication that the bishop could determine the posture during the consecration. There is a Vatican response to this precise question (If there are no kneelers, does that mean that the congregation does not have to kneel?), but I can’t find it online as it’s been 10 or more years since I read it.
As to the OP, if there is some reason for not kneeling, it is not mentioned. Neither lack of kneelers nor a desire to “give praise and thanksgiving with our whole bodies” that is not accomplished by kneeling is “a reasonable cause.”
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
Actually, I quite agree with Oneofthewomen’s statement.
The characterisations used by the author of the piece that appears on EWTN I find to be indeed regrettable, as Oneofthewomen does, and I found several of his passages quite remarkable. He makes conclusions about intent and purpose that are beyond unfortunate.
Rather than a straightforward writing of facts dispassionately, as one should hope for by the holder of a pontifical licentiate, his engagement of a sort of editorialising is really not commendable; it is also counter-productive to his presumed purpose.
The GIRM provides for what is to be done in the event a reasonable cause precludes anyone from kneeling. Such are directed to make a profound bow when the celebrant genuflects after each showing of the consecrated elements. In the language of the law, “reasonable cause” is not an extreme standard to meet.
S
St_Francis
Guest
My problem was with the implication (intentional or accidental) that the bishop had authority over kneeling at the Consecration. The material *in *the link, eg, the quotes provided in the link, showed that the bishop does not have this authority.
I did not go back and check precisely what I was referring to when I wrote the second post, so mistakenly wrote “what EWTN wrote” instead of what I should have written, which was, “what EWTN quoted” or “what EWTN included.”
I apologize for the confusion.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
From the GIRM for the US, my emphasis added.
Should does not equal must!
It is very disturbing to me that so many people want to pin a label of disobedience on a priest and/or Bishop who is acting completely within his competency.
Yes, a Bishop and/or Pastor do have the right to make that determination based on the needs of their flocks at the time.
Should does not equal must!
It is very disturbing to me that so many people want to pin a label of disobedience on a priest and/or Bishop who is acting completely within his competency.
D
dans0622
Guest
Church buildings should include kneelers or cushions, so that the people can observe the liturgical regulations with as much convenience as is possible. As we read in the USCCB document entitled “Built of Living Stones”:
Dan
T
trinnnnity
Guest
Dearest JOL,
Welcome back to the most Beautiful and Holy Roman Catholic Church!!
I was in your shoes about 20 years ago.
I go to church in the US where it is customary to have kneelers and pews, I am easily distracted and need help w/being reverent. After a while, I learned about the GIRMs and all but: for me:
it has been my observation that when I go to a church where they stand after receiving Holy Communion, I do not pray, I try to close my eyes and sing but I look at babies, I look at cute shoes etc.
After a while I realized that these churches, correct as they may be, are called Catholic Communities, people yak their brains out before, during and after Mass, have altar girls, clap for the choir and yes, in 2016, have pita bread for the Eucharistic bread.
This is MY observation. I know it’s not ALWAYS true.
There are other churches available out there and they are correct also.
Right now I go to a Roman Catholic Novus Ordo parish where the priest is reverent, the homilies are quite wonderful and challenging, the people are generally reverent also, I don’t have to be afraid of what may happen during Mass. This creates an area in my life of growth, love and I more easily feel merciful and generous the rest of the week.
I know absolutely, Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God is present in every tabernacle. Also, I know it’s not wise to run your life on your “feelings” alone.
Father Benedict Groeschel said (paraphrased) that in the old days, it was preferable to attend your geographic parish but nowadays we have cars and we can go where we choose.
And actually, if you attend every day or ordinary Sunday Mass in almost any European cathedral/church you will sit in an area of chairs or pews and will frequently have kneelers. The entire church is not filled with pews and all, this is true. But an area before a popularly used altar, out of the dozens in the church, will have
all this.
Welcome back to the most Beautiful and Holy Roman Catholic Church!!
I was in your shoes about 20 years ago.
I go to church in the US where it is customary to have kneelers and pews, I am easily distracted and need help w/being reverent. After a while, I learned about the GIRMs and all but: for me:
it has been my observation that when I go to a church where they stand after receiving Holy Communion, I do not pray, I try to close my eyes and sing but I look at babies, I look at cute shoes etc.
After a while I realized that these churches, correct as they may be, are called Catholic Communities, people yak their brains out before, during and after Mass, have altar girls, clap for the choir and yes, in 2016, have pita bread for the Eucharistic bread.
This is MY observation. I know it’s not ALWAYS true.
There are other churches available out there and they are correct also.
Right now I go to a Roman Catholic Novus Ordo parish where the priest is reverent, the homilies are quite wonderful and challenging, the people are generally reverent also, I don’t have to be afraid of what may happen during Mass. This creates an area in my life of growth, love and I more easily feel merciful and generous the rest of the week.
I know absolutely, Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God is present in every tabernacle. Also, I know it’s not wise to run your life on your “feelings” alone.
Father Benedict Groeschel said (paraphrased) that in the old days, it was preferable to attend your geographic parish but nowadays we have cars and we can go where we choose.
And actually, if you attend every day or ordinary Sunday Mass in almost any European cathedral/church you will sit in an area of chairs or pews and will frequently have kneelers. The entire church is not filled with pews and all, this is true. But an area before a popularly used altar, out of the dozens in the church, will have
all this.
O
otjm
Guest
You are right, they should. And many of us may know a parish here or there which, some years ago, chose differently. How long it will take for some of those parishes to return to the norm is a pure guess. It is easy to decide that a certain hill is worth dying on, if one is not doing the dying.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Yes, *on those basises. *Not on the basis quoted in the OP.
They do not have the authority to do *what is described on the OP. *It is very disturbing to me that so many people want to pin a label of disobedience on a priest and/or Bishop who is acting completely within his competency.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
Yes, they do, as it may be “reasonable cause”. The OP does not have all the information needed to determine if “just cause” has not been met. The OP does not state whether or not the Ordinary of the Diocese has approved or disapproved of what said parish is doing.
Unless and until those questions are answered, we cannot know, nor should we proscribe, what the motivations of the Pastor of said parish are.
O
otjm
Guest
That may be, but the decision to set up seating without kneelers was likely done long ago. It is not as if this decision is being made today.
We may all agree the decision was wrong-headed, but the likelihood that the decision is going to be changed is somewhere between slim and none, with the odds favoring none.
Should is an operative word, and we can all agree that is (providing kneelers) what should be done in that parish; and in fact, we cannot say specifically from the information given (the comment in the bulletin) that such statement was the reason it was done without kneelers.
The bottom line is that the GIRM provides that in such circumstances, then people are to stand, and at the appropriate times, bow. As Father Ruggero noted, the comments in EWTN suggest individuals do otherwise, and other threads have indicated that some do otherwise (as in, kneeling on the floor).
It should be obvious the GIRM emphasizes a common posture; kneeling in such a parish is to not a common posture, so now we have the issue of the appearance that two wrongs are now a right. The old phrase “When in Rome…” comes to mind, particularly as Rome has seen fit to make a provision for such a parish.
J
JOL
Guest
Thank you for the kind welcome Trinnnnity! I totally get what you are saying. I am easily distracted too. I think when you grow accustomed to something, it can be difficult to switch to something else. I grew up in an area with old (1800’s) churches. My parish that I grew in during my childhood and adolescence included beautiful art, stained glass windows. It looked like a mini-cathedral with images of saints and murals on the ceiling, with a magnificent image of Jesus behind the alter. When I went to my first Catholic church in my current area, I was not sure what happened. Some churches were so bland in the appearance/feel (loud talking while people are sitting there praying or waiting for confession, etc), it was no different than being in a protestant church. Even with weird set ups for the tabernacle. I enjoy visiting my parish back home when I visit.
I am so thankful though, above all this stuff that causes distractions, that He has stuck with me and is bringing me home again!
D
dans0622
Guest
Sure, there are who-knows-how-many variables going on and so it’s not really possible to say definitively who has done what “wrong.” I have suspicions about what the rationale is, at the parish mentioned in the OP, but who cares about suspicions? I don’t, for one.
Anyway, I recall one assignment I had in canon law school involved the following (somewhat) hypothetical situation: the bishop of a diocese signs legislation mandating that all churches in the diocese, contrary to past practice, are to have kneelers. A certain parish, however, wanted to be exempted from the legislation. My assignment was to compose a request for a “privilege” which would result in that exemption being granted to the parish. I used reasons such as “we don’t have the money and the vast majority of the people here can’t kneel anyway due to age and health reasons.”
So, yes, there are various ways for various practices to be “legal” even if they are out of the ordinary. Does any of this apply to the case at hand? Again, who knows.
Dan
Anyway, I recall one assignment I had in canon law school involved the following (somewhat) hypothetical situation: the bishop of a diocese signs legislation mandating that all churches in the diocese, contrary to past practice, are to have kneelers. A certain parish, however, wanted to be exempted from the legislation. My assignment was to compose a request for a “privilege” which would result in that exemption being granted to the parish. I used reasons such as “we don’t have the money and the vast majority of the people here can’t kneel anyway due to age and health reasons.”
So, yes, there are various ways for various practices to be “legal” even if they are out of the ordinary. Does any of this apply to the case at hand? Again, who knows.
Dan
O
otjm
Guest
S
St_Francis
Guest
Given what was quoted from the site, what reasonable cause is there for not kneeling?
And I certainly said nothing about anyone’s motives.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Lack of kneelers is not a reasonable cause for lack of kneeling–as I mentioned earlier, I read this in response from the Vatican, but cannot now find the document.
O
otjm
Guest
I will quote from Don Ruggero’s post: “The GIRM provides for what is to be done in the event a reasonable cause precludes anyone from kneeling. Such are directed to make a profound bow when the celebrant genuflects after each showing of the consecrated elements. In the language of the law, “reasonable cause” is not an extreme standard to meet.”
The GIRM presumes common postures; people stand together, sit together, kneel together.
It also speaks specifically to those times we normally kneel, where the congregation might not kneel (from the GIRM) “In the Dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause”.
For the sake of unity of posture, which the GIRM sets forth, one stands when in a parish in which there are no kneelers. It really is not all that hard to do, and avoids the appearance of “I know better”. Putting one’s personal opinion on the matter over and above both what the congregation is doing and what the GIRM provides for in such circumstance borders on pride over humility.
In the past, I have attended Mass in a parish in another city with a relative, in which they only had chairs; and the chairs were relatively close together. Could one kneel? Certainly, if one either didn’t mind kicking the chairs and the time it took to get down in the relatively narrow space, and kicking them again when one got up. I will be the first to admit standing felt awkward, but it was not and still is not my decision to determine that lack of kneelers was or was not a reasonable cause, in particular since Rome had provided more than one grounds for that decision to have been made long before I ever got there.
Dans0622 pointed out that a church should have kneelers. He also noted that it was not for him to decide, based on suspicion, why that church had not done so in the beginning. That is entirely up to the bishop to correct if correction is needed, and there is no automatic presumption that it is needed when one finds a parish without kneelers. If the bishop has not required them to put in kneelers or to kneel during the consecration, then it might be wise if we do not choose to be more correct than the bishop.
“Should” is hortatory, not a command.
So the short of it is that it is not for you, or for me, or for others to decide that the congregation standing during the consecration is not for reasonable cause. If anything, it is for the bishop to decide, and for a parish which has been doing this for decades (and I would hazard a guess the parish in question has been doing so), then it is likely that not one, but two or more bishops have decided that there is a reasonable cause. And they do not owe each and every one of us an explanation.
S
St_Francis
Guest
I would like to try to clarify what I am saying by way of an analogy.
The Church teaches that we are obliged to attend Mass each Sunday. (Like all analogies, I realize this is imperfect because kneeling is a discipline…)
If I break my leg in the way to Mass, the obligation is lifted.
My pastor can dispense the obligation of I will be traveling.
However, the priest ought not dispense if I ask because I want to go to a keg party and want to sleep in the following day.
In the same way, people with bad knees are not required to kneel. When there is insufficient space, one is not required to kneel. But how can standing during the Consecration because it allows one to worship with one’s whole body, as it states in the parish websote, a reasonable cause to stand instead of kneel?
The Church teaches that we are obliged to attend Mass each Sunday. (Like all analogies, I realize this is imperfect because kneeling is a discipline…)
If I break my leg in the way to Mass, the obligation is lifted.
My pastor can dispense the obligation of I will be traveling.
However, the priest ought not dispense if I ask because I want to go to a keg party and want to sleep in the following day.
In the same way, people with bad knees are not required to kneel. When there is insufficient space, one is not required to kneel. But how can standing during the Consecration because it allows one to worship with one’s whole body, as it states in the parish websote, a reasonable cause to stand instead of kneel?
O
otjm
Guest
I am not sure if you are not understanding what the GIRM says, or just wish to argue with me. So I will try this again.
The GIRM states that for the following reasons, standing is permitted: “except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause”
That gives four reasons: 1) ill health (does not apply to the OP); 2) lack of space (this may well apply, but we don’t really have enough information); 3) a large number of people present (would seem not to apply, from what the OP stated); 4) other reasonable cause.
I would give dollars to donuts this has been going on in that parish for several decades, if for no other reason than that where I have come across a similar situation, it was going on since at least the 80’s, if not the 70’s. For whatever reason, they (the parish in Oregon) do not have kneelers.
I will also give dollars to donuts this bishop knows the situation, and if it has been going on for decades, it is entirely possible that a goodly number of bishops have known about the parish and none of them have changed things.
To give an example; it occurs down valley in a parish I know in my Archdiocese. Since 1970, we have had a combination of archbishops (now on our 6th) and auxiliary bishops (now on our third) and I have no question that all nine of them have known about this parish, unless the first one, who retired in 1974, did not have this happen while he was on duty.
And not one of them has changed it.
I am trying to make three points: 1) it doesn’t really matter what the website says; what matters is that they have been doing it for X number of years, with how many bishops or archbishops aware of it? Bunches.
- It is not the norm but it is provided for in the GIRM, and there appear to be two possible exceptions the GIRM gives which could apply. And it does not matter which one.
- It does not matter in the least as to why the bishop permits it, as that is within his liturgical area of responsibility, expertise, and judgement. The last exception provides a range of possible reasons the bishop may choose to allow it, and it is not our responsibility, expertise, or state of being to challenge it, as it is permitted by Rome, the exceptions are laid out, and they do not require the bishop to answer to us, plead with us, bargain with us, apologize to us, or be told he is wrong.
And if I don’t like it, there are a number of other parishes I can attend for Mass. It is like not liking married deacons; I might possibly think all should be celibate, but that is frankly absolutely none of my business.
Neither I (who have no idea why a bishop allowed it, and why others have continued to allow it) nor anyone else has any need to know why it was allowed. All we need to know is that Rome has provided the bishop with the guidance he needs, and that ends the discussion.
I don’t know why the website says what it does. And it has absolutely no relevance, as to the permissability; the GIRM exceptions, and the choice of how many bishops is the determining factor. And that would not change if the website said nothing, or talked about the Church in the early centuries, or whatever.
Just to make an off-the-wall example,the pastor could say his sainted mother belonged to a Protestant church and they stood during the communion service, and in honor of his mother, this parish stands. That is totally irrelevant; what matters is that the bishop decides ultimately.
The only thing that matters is that this is a decision for the bishop. And the odds are, a bunch of bishops over time have all decided the same thing.
- Status