The USCCB approved the Norms in the the GIRM for the US.
The “church” does not direct standing as the norm. The USCCB does.
Nevertheless, it is also true that the liturgical norms do allow some flexibility. With reference to the central and most important liturgical action, the Mass, for example, we can speak of three levels of flexibility. First, there are in the Missal and the Lectionary some alternative texts, rites, chants, readings and blessings from which the priest celebrant can choose. (cf GIRM 24, RS 39) Then there are choices left at the competence of the diocesan bishop or the Conference of Bishops. Examples are regulation of concelebration, norms regarding the distribution of Communion under both kinds, the construction and ordering of churches, translations and some gestures. (cf SC 38, 40; GIRM 387, 390) Some such alternatives require *recognitio* from the Holy See. The most demanding level of variability concerns inculturation in the strictest sense. It involves action by the Conference of Bishops, after the conducting of deep interdisciplinary studies and *recognitio* from the Holy See.not true… (Q) if the directive were to stand, why would kneeling be allowed? (A) because standing is not a mandate
yes there are some… but perhaps it is because they are overly concerned with the liturgy being more about Him, and less about us. Each of the concerns mentioned here seem to have a common denominator: What can I or We do differently in the Liturgy that should have us in a full state of awe.
Do you mean the Church in American, the Church in the Holy See, or what… perhaps we can answer that better after a clear explanation of what will happen at the Synod.
Yes, and anyone who says the Church has condemned kneeling to receive communion is mistaken and needs to properly inform themself before making such rash statements.
No freedom of conscience and common sense.
I say this with all due respect for your sensibilities
, but you don’t understand how this works. If your bishop is silent on hand holding it’s because it has been repudiated by the Vatican, therefore, he doesn’t need to add his okay to this repudiation. His silence supports the ruling not negates it. Really though, if this is an ongoing problem in his diocese he ought to make it clear that this practice has been repudiated instead of letting people go on thinking it’s all right when it isn’t.Chalice said:
Naturally. I never said they shouldn’t.
No, it would be my right to let the bishop know that many of us disagree with his reasoning and why. We’re not puppets, but members of the same Church. Unless and until he ruled otherwise I would, of course, follow his directive, no matter how ill-considered I believed it to be. Btw, MY bishop has NOT made such a ruling, thanks be. He sees no good reason to alter what is already in the rubrics (even though he could), and I think him very wise in that regard.
I am speaking of the Western Church in the USA. That should go without saying.
This “freedom of conscience” is one of the most septic things to strike in a long time. Disagree with the Church? That’s OK, you can just dissent because your conscience requires you to.No freedom of conscience and common sense.
Well, it is unfortunate that some people have used both these perfectly good expressions to justify open dissent against Church teaching, but I am not using these expressions in that way, but in the way they are truly meant to be used, with holy wisdom and a well-formed conscience.
It should be noted that the parish in question is located in the USA and is also affiliated with a local Archdiocese.
Your Slavak parish is not part of the Western (or Latin) Church.
Excellent point MrS!
Perhaps my intention was misread as if I were agreeing with “progressive” movements (changing externals) in the liturgy. I do not agree with the vast majority of them… because we should be in a full state of awe and only concerned with the internals. Any postures, actions, fellowships too often become externals that take away from the internal.
Unfortunately, it is not the parish I attend. It is too far away
. Anyway, as far as I know, it is not an Eastern Rite parish! It is a Latin Rite parish. The priest celebrates the Normative (Pauline) Mass, he just does so without all the unfortunate innovations and illicit adaptations that are so rampant elsewhere.
On the contrary.
yeah, you better watch if fella… or the n.m mom will definitely set you straight…http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_6_200v.gif