Do you have an example of a saint who flaunted rejection of the law?
Again “may not be denied Communion” is not translated as allowed.
Again, the authentic interpreter of the law said the norm was allowed with the understanding kneeling would always be permitted.
Mysty, unfortunately, you are now putting your interpretation over what is presented in the GIRM, with your “hopefully comply next time statement”. In fact, this is nowhere stated in the instruction. As copied from your post #59:
Therefore, if you want to suggest that “‘may not be denied communion’ is not translated as allowed”, then you must also concede that “providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm” is not translated as “will be reprimanded and told to discontinue the practice”.
This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has received your letter dated December 1, 2002, related to the application of the norms approved by the Conference of Bishops of the United States of America, with the subsequent *recognitio* of this Congregation, as regards the question of the posture for receiving Holy Communion.
***As the authority by virtue of whose recognitio the norm in question has attained the force of law, this Dicastery is competent to specify the manner in which the norm is to be understood for the sake of a proper application***. Having received more than a few letters regarding this matter from different locations in the United States of America,*** the Congregation wishes to ensure that its position on the matter is clear.***
To this end, it is perhaps useful to respond to your inquiry by repeating the content of a letter that the Congregation recently addressed to a Bishop in the United States of America from whose Diocese a number of pertinent letters had been received. The letter states: ".**..while this Congregation gave the *recognitio* to the norm desired by the Bishops' Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion".**
This Dicastery hopes that the citation given here will provide an adequate answer to your letter. At the same time, please be assured that the Congregation remains ready to be of assistance if you should need to contact it again.
With every prayerful good wish, I am
Sincerely yours in Christ,And now you feel that it is necessary to resort to* ad hominem* attacks? Sad. Just sad.
Is one always required to make a sacramental communion when present at Mass, and not in a state of mortal sin? If so, please advise where I can find this explicated. I always make a spiritual communion, in any case.
I will pray for you as well.
Actually, if you read closely, I mentioned S. Francis as an example of possible impracticality; not in order to justify breaking a law. In any event, when one receives Holy Communion kneeling at a Mass in the United States celebrated according to the normative rite, one is** not breaking any law,** as the Congregation for Divine Worship has made quite clear.
I disagree. In any case, it was not so much a comparison as an illustration of what some people are subjected to in order satisfy the wishes for others. You yourself have admitted that I am not being disobedient, but “very unpractical, and inconsiderate.” So, in charity, I have made an offer to receive Holy Communion last, so as to protect those who would be inconvenienced by my receiving on my knees in, say, the middle of the line. This necessitates sitting in the back of the church building, which naturally raises the specter of the treatment of Negroes during segregation. You may disagree, but I can’t see how it makes the comparison (or analogy) “invalid.”
Youraction was voluntary, theirs was not.
I did not say that
I said that hopefully they will comply, which would be the reason for instructing on the norm. Why else would you give an instruction?
Strictly speaking this is true, and thus would weaken (but not invalidate) the analogy. However, in order for those who wish to lawfully receive Holy Communion kneeling without being “inconsiderate of those around them” they would* have to* place themselves at the back of the church, so as to be last in line.
Fine. Obviously there’s not really much I can do about the things which you will or will not discuss.
And no one has asked you to–certainly not me! I just wanted to know if you were aware of any doctrine or legislation which mandated this. I guess that the answer is, No.
The point is, the reason isn’t listed in the GIRM, therefore any speculation on that is just personal interpretation. In fact, the recognitio from the Congregation for Divine Worship is the ultimate authority in interpreting this issue, and their interpretation is at odds with yours. Is it possible that your own personal preference is biasing your interpretation of these texts?
Anything is possible, but I do not believe a letter superceds a law. The law has not been changed, so it should be observed.
No, just enforsed my opinion.
), if the norm were not standing. The letter is not meant to superceded law! It is an authentic interpretation of the law! Accept it. I also am suspicious that the elderly relative tripping is your issue as it was not mentioned until later in either thread. if it was your primary concern then it would have been led first. My kneeling is soemthing that I do for my own personal and intimate reasons. Again, maybe you need to focus on your own recption of the Eucharist and leave the rest of the faithful in peace. The Holy Spirit can help you with this.I wasn’t of a Church law on clothing. How can you make such a rediculous comparison? I do see that you really don’t know the difference between a law and someone’s preference—do you have such a problem with all authority? Do other laws bother you as much?
I wasn’t aware of a Church law on clothing. How can you make such a rediculous comparison? I do see that you really don’t know the difference between a law and someone’s preference—do you have such a problem with all authority? Do other laws bother you as much?
Becuase a higher authority, the Vatican, is the final interpreter of the GIRM. Why can’t you accept that?
Whoa! I have no anger problem. I am not bringing this topic up and calling all those who kneel disobedient. Again, me thinks thou doth protest to much. The Vatican has spoken on this issue. Kneeling is permitted. What is your problem with that?