Posture for Holy Communion-Clarified

[Cherub]

Mysty101:

I hope this will be my last post on this subject. I never said anyone should be denied Communion, called disobedient, nor made any slurs against conservative Bishops or Catholics.

I just asked a lone kneeler in a standing Parish to be reasonable, and rethink their forcing their personal piety on others.

Somewhere personal notion of reverence overtook charity—I do not think this is in keeping with the greatest commandments.

If you wish to kneel, you could go to a place where there are provisions, and if that is not possible maybe offer it up.

You speak of intent—I doubt the CDW intended for anyone to refuse to support their shepherd.

I motion we boycott this whole thread. Mysty must be getting really exhausted trying to instruct all of us wayward kneeling people how to support our shepherd, and repeating “again, I never said…” scores of times per day. And certainly we are all exhausted with showing her the reality of the matter time and time and time again. It is doing no good to keep turning the light on when Mysty is wearing shades.

Yours personally piously and perhaps but not intentionally uncharitably,
Cherub

 

[fix]

Mysty101:

Oh excuse me. I guess in your world agreeing with someone who badmouths is different—I may not call you a “badmouther”

The truth is not bad mouthing.

 

[fix]

Panis Angelicas:

Mysty, that “history lesson” was provided on October 26, 2004 on the now-archived thread, forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=19241&page=2&pp=100.

In that thread, even Deacon Ed, who certainly prefers that the faithful stand to receive, stated:

The fact that you “see” only the norm as law doesn’t make it the only law to be observed.

The fact that some of us observe the universal law and cannot be punished or accused of disobedience if we do not follow that particular American norm does not mean that we are acting out of pride, arrogance, defiance, disobedience, nor illicitness.

You have done a great job outlining this entire issue. I do not know what else to say.

 

[fix]

Mysty101:

I hope this will be my last post on this subject. I never said anyone should be denied Communion, called disobedient, nor made any slurs against conservative Bishops or Catholics.

I just asked a lone kneeler in a standing Parish to be reasonable, and rethink their forcing their personal piety on others.

Huh? Forcing it on others? Are you for real?

Somewhere personal notion of reverence overtook charity—I do not think this is in keeping with the greatest commandments.

Their kneeling is supported by the Church. To make that an enemy of charity is uncharitable.

You speak of intent—I doubt the CDW intended for anyone to refuse to support their shepherd.

Kneeling is not refusing to support anyone’s Shepherd. No Shepherd has any authority to prohibit kneeling. If they do, their orders are unjust and no one should obey any unjust command.

 

[Mysty101]

Cherub:

I motion we boycott this whole thread. Cherub

And I second that motion.

Oh—whoever brought up the threads (I think it was Panis) thanks—I forgot about this

Originally Posted by Mysty101

*I was just posting this in another thread, but it is also very appropriate in this thread.

In “Authenticity", on pg 175, Dubay states, “In both testaments God identifies himself with his representatives, and that is why cooperation with them is a sure sign of compliance with God’s will."

Nothing about sin or disobedience, just submission of your will and respect and support of your Bishop.*

 

[Mysty101]

And another one—thanks again

Mt 16:18 And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

19 I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

RS
THE REGULATION OF THE SACRED LITURGY
[14.] “The regulation of the Sacred Liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, which rests specifically with the Apostolic See and, according to the norms of law, with the Bishop.[34]

Oh look at that “norms”, but some believe norms are “customs” and merely suggestions, not laws

(but this is only if they are challenged otherwise the norm for the US is something different than what is written in the GIRM)

 

[Panis_Angelicas]

Mysty101:

[14.] “The regulation of the Sacred Liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, which rests specifically with the Apostolic See and, according to the norms of law, with the Bishop.[34]

Oh look at that “norms”, but some believe norms are “customs” and merely suggestions, not laws

(but this is only if they are challenged otherwise the norm for the US is something different than what is written in the GIRM)

Mysty, you unwittingly prove our point.

Please stop deriding fellow Catholics who, in good faith, disagree with you.

 

[Mysty101]

Just a summation of endless rehashing…

There is the GIRM, with many instructions on postures, authority of the Bishops (especially regarding approved norms), plus the norm of standing to receive Holy Communion in the US, not to mention the Communion procession. Plus a long tradition of deferring to the authority of the Bishop.

Then there is an ambiguous document of questionable legality, still with careful wording. Obviously the standing norm cannot be overwritten.

RS was officially introduced, which reiterated the norm (flagons and the pouring of the Precious Blood were reprobated, but the standing norm was left unchanged) If there was a question about the intent of the standing norm this would have been the time to clarify or change it.

I never badmouthed anyone, claiming it was the truth, nor showed any disrespect for Conservative Bishops.

As I said, do you really think it is in keeping with community worship to call attention to yourself by kneeling in the middle of the Communion Procession? (and yes, it is calling attention to yourself, even if this is not your intention)

Is this for Jesus? (would He really want you to be so unsupportive of you Pastor & Bishop) or is it for you?

 

[Mysty101]

PS There is one other point I wish to make.

For those who question the intent or strength of the standing norm

The instruction was issued regarding denying Holy Communion to a person kneeling, and I have heard reports of priests attempting to refuse. What was done about this? Was it reported? Were there consequences?

Perhaps this instruction was issued with no INTENT to enforce it?

 

[fix]

Mysty101:

Then there is an ambiguous document of questionable legality, still with careful wording. Obviously the standing norm cannot be overwritten.

Not ambiguous. The document is from the dicastery in charge. They decide how it is to be applied. Why do you think these questions were addressed to them in the first place? They have the authority.

RS was officially introduced, which reiterated the norm (flagons and the pouring of the Precious Blood were reprobated, but the standing norm was left unchanged) If there was a question about the intent of the standing norm this would have been the time to clarify or change it.

What was to chage? Rome said kneeling was never intended to be abolished.

I never badmouthed anyone, claiming it was the truth, nor showed any disrespect for Conservative Bishops.

Conservative meaning orthodox.

As I said, do you really think it is in keeping with community worship to call attention to yourself by kneeling in the middle of the Communion Procession? (and yes, it is calling attention to yourself, even if this is not your intention)

Do you really think you have the authority to so lightly set aside the authority of the Vatican?

Is this for Jesus? (would He really want you to be so unsupportive of you Pastor & Bishop) or is it for you?

The same could be said of you. Are you a Catholic or a clericalist?

 

[fix]

Mysty101:

PS There is one other point I wish to make.

For those who question the intent or strength of the standing norm

The instruction was issued regarding denying Holy Communion to a person kneeling, and I have heard reports of priests attempting to refuse. What was done about this? Was it reported? Were there consequences?

Perhaps this instruction was issued with no INTENT to enforce it?

Prot. N. 47/03/L

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has received your letter dated 1 December 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 Congegation, 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,
Mons. Mario Marini
Undersecretary

A bishop wrote to these folks. Why? Becuase the bishop knows they are the authority to go to.

 

[Mysty101]

Again RS was written after this letter, and the norm was left unchanged. You are still using only one document, and your own interpretation. Now you are saying a Bishop before it was the Pope. The Pope signed RS & the GIRM. And you have made numerous slurs against me and the USCCB.

I am not arguing with the letter. I am asking people to defer to the decision of their Shepherd (and an approved norm, where the Bishops definitely have authority) as to what best suits the common good.
As one poster pointed out–we are called to give our Shepherd this respect. If a Pastor has determined that it is a common need, and has made provisions for kneeling, this is an acceptable compromise, but to kneel in the middle of a standing procession (because it is your right)? Is this the best choice?

I repeat

Mysty101:

PS There is one other point I wish to make.

For those who question the intent or strength of the standing norm

The instruction was issued regarding denying Holy Communion to a person kneeling, and I have heard reports of priests attempting to refuse. What was done about this? Was it reported? Were there consequences?

Perhaps this instruction was issued with no INTENT to enforce it?

You have not answered as to what was done if someone was refused.

 

[fix]

Mysty101:

Again RS was written after this letter, and the norm was left unchanged. You are still using only one document, and your own interpretation. Now you are saying a Bishop before it was the Pope. The Pope signed RS & the GIRM. And you have made numerous slurs against me and the USCCB.

That is the point. It is not my interpretation, but the Vatican’s own directive and interpretation. I have not slurred anyone. I have characterized your view on this matter. It is my opinion of your view. I have not said anything about the USCCB.

I am not arguing with the letter. I am asking people to defer to the decision of their Shepherd (and an approved norm, where the Bishops definitely have authority) as to what best suits the common good.

The people are obliged to obey the higher authority. Are there bishops claiming the Vatican directive should be ignored?

As one poster pointed out–we are called to give our Shepherd this respect. If a Pastor has determined that it is a common need, and has made provisions for kneeling, this is an acceptable compromise, but to kneel in the middle of a standing procession (because it is your right)? Is this the best choice?

Has a situation arised where a priest or bishop has said their authority is to be obeyed over what the Vatican intends?

You have not answered as to what was done if someone was refused.

I do not have knowledge of any particular situation. The priest who did it would answer to the bishop I would imagine.

 

[netmilsmom]

Defensor Fidei:

Now if there is one person out of 500 in a Mass that has to kneel…big deal, that show boat mentality will catch up to that person.

-Ted

I’m sorry Ted but the way you put this is pretty offensive.
I have been at a NO church where kneeling IS the norm. A few weeks ago, I attended a Holy Mass at another church. Remembering all the fuss made here about kneeling, I chose not to go to Communion. It’s not “Show Boat”, it’s that I am genuinely uncomfortable standing to receive Our Lord.
I don’t understand why people are so judgemental about this. I guess those who don’t want people to knee, would prefer that we stay in our seats. Not receiving Our Lord for your comfort, I don’t get it.

 

[Exporter]

Mysty 101,

Mysty wrote." I just wanted to see if there was a significant number of people who go for “private inclination or arbitrary choice.” rather than “what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God," .in spite of the instructions”

---

You say you want to know how people recieve Communion, standing or kneeling.

The you say," what serves the common spiritual good of the People".

**I think you are mixed up. An individual DOES NOT recieve Communion for the “good of other people”. Recieving Communion is an extremely personal event. **

You have taken a Socialistic bent. Do you recieve Communion for “other people”?

 

[rcn]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

A few weeks ago, I attended a Holy Mass at another church. Remembering all the fuss made here about kneeling, I chose not to go to Communion.

Oh no you don’t. You can’t blame your decision not to receive communion, on an Internet board. I don’t believe it, not for a minute.

It’s not “Show Boat”, it’s that I am genuinely uncomfortable standing to receive Our Lord.

So you are uncomfortable with something permitted by the authority of the Church to set matters of discipline? I don’t understand. Regardless, you know full well that you will not be turned away if you kneel.

 

[netmilsmom]

rcn:

Oh no you don’t. You can’t blame your decision not to receive communion, on an Internet board. I don’t believe it, not for a minute. So you are uncomfortable with something permitted by the authority of the Church to set matters of discipline? I don’t understand. Regardless, you know full well that you will not be turned away if you kneel.

Truly, I didn’t want to get in the way but was not comfortable. I chose to go to a later Holy Mass at my own church.

All I’m saying is that my choice is not “Show Boat”. I am uncomfortable standing. I know I would not be turned away, but the event was a Blessing of Polish Dance children from all over our city. They were the focus. Would I be drawing attention to myself? Who knows, but it was not my church, not the norm and may have been looked at wrong.

I’m stating that some of the people on this thread see kneeling as a big “look at me” issue. With me it is not. I was not “blaming” an internet board for my decision, I was trying to understand the way people feel and be considerate. Wow! Emotions are running high here.

 

[RichT]

I find it very interesting that there are some who will kneel regardless of what the rest of the church is doing, and by all means have at it! Personally I don’t really care what you choose to do, however, most of you are the same ones who get all flustered when a couple chooses to stand side by side to receive communion. I hear things like, “Their showboating”, or “Their just trying to stand out”, or “How can that be allowed when it goes against what the norm is?” That last one really blows my mind considering what you are all bickering about.

Find some better use of your time, like going out and taking food to a homeless person, or a homebound person.

 

[Mysty101]

Exporter:

Mysty 101,

The you say," what serves the common spiritual good of the People".

Ah another shouter,

But it is not I who has set the norm, “which serves the common Spiritual good”, it is the Bishops.

Although many of you only accept the GIRM as law if the norms are to your liking, but here it is.

1. The gestures and posture of the priest, the deacon, and the ministers, as well as those of the people, ought to contribute to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, so that the true and full meaning of the different parts of the celebration is evident and that the participation of all is fostered.52 Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice

.

A common posture, to be observed by all participants, is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered for the Sacred Liturgy: it both expresses and fosters the intention and spiritual attitude of the participants.

 

[Mysty101]

fix:

That is the point. It is not my interpretation, but the Vatican’s own directive and interpretation. I have not slurred anyone. I have characterized your view on this matter. It is my opinion of your view. I have not said anything about the USCCB.

Who are the Americans you slur?

The people are obliged to obey the higher authority. Are there bishops claiming the Vatican directive should be ignored?

For the thousandth time, I have acknowledged the document, and agreed that nobody should be denied or called disobedient. You are claiming the GIRM should be ignored.

I do not have knowledge of any particular situation. The priest who did it would answer to the bishop I would imagine.

You would imagine?
Gee, according to you, the GIRM is just a “suggestion.” As I said (to which you noticably did not respond) Perhaps this instruction was issued with no INTENT to enforce it?