Receive Communion standing or kneeling?

[Patrick2340]

The old saying goes, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” Though I regularly attend Mass according to the 1962 Missal, on those occasions where I find myself at a new Mass, I follow the norms according to the new GIRM. I do this just as I would follow the norms at a Byzantine, Syro-Malabar, or Melkite Divine Liturgy.

Outward actions are often indicative of inward disposition. When we’re at the ballgame, and somebody refuses to remove his hat and stand during the National Anthem we fully understand the message he is sending. Similarly, when we’re at Mass and someone fails to perform those actions that would indicate reverence to Our Lord, we understand that this person either has a poor and/or incomplete understanding of the Real Presence, or a spiritual indifference to it.

That said, its difficult to make the argument that Catholics who are doing what their bishops tell them to do are irreverent somehow. I would suggest that perhaps our frustration should be reserved for the prelates who have accepted this norm. I also presume that should Rome ever decide to revoke permission for standing to receive Holy Communion all those who have castigated “kneelers” would be willing to return to kneeling to receive Holy Communion in a spirit of obedience.

Finally, the real problem isn’t Vatican II. Nowhere in the documents of the Second Vatican Council was it ordered or even suggested that altar rails be removed or that Communion should be received standing. The problem lies in the implementation of Vatican II. Specifically, the problem lies with a Vatican bureaucracy either incapable or unwilling to enforce its own decrees.

Why is it that I can go to any of the six Catholic Churches in my city and not find the same Mass at any of them? I’m not even referring to those parts of the Mass that have options. Maybe its the Pope, maybe its a conflicted Vatican, maybe its weak bishops, maybe its disobedient priests, maybe its dissident nuns, or perhaps its an indifferent and ignorant laity, but regardless, the Church is a mess. The Mass is fluid, sometimes irrecognizable. Catechesis is poor, if extant at all. Every Catholic poll seems to indicate a loss of the faith.

Satan divides. Christ unites. Why do we hurl insults and trade barbs at each other? The enemy is among us. It seems to me that our task isn’t to play the blame game, but rather to work tirelessly to repair the damage.

Sorry for my rant, but I’m getting tired of so much dissension. We’re Christians. The foundation of our Faith is Love. We’re supposed to LOVE each other. All I can see is hatred.

My God, My God, why have you forsaken us?

 

[bear06]

Mysty101:

You totally missed my point. I am talking about how the person who is unable to kneel (but wishes he could) feels when he sees others kneeling.

I didn’t missed your point. My question is that why is it any different from the way those who can’t stand but wish they could feel when they see everyone standing?

 

[Mysty101]

bear06:

I didn’t missed your point. My question is that why is it any different from the way those who can’t stand but wish they could feel when they see everyone standing?

We do need to assume some position . All who kneel can stand, but not all who stand can kneel, and therefore standing would accommodate more people in a uniform posture.

 

[bear06]

Mysty101:

We do need to assume some position . All who kneel can stand, but not all who stand can kneel, and therefore standing would accommodate more people in a uniform posture.

I’d agree with you here. Uniform posture is far different from the feelings of those who desire to kneel but can’t. As I remember back 200 posts or so that you’re not so concerned with the uniform posture as you are that those who choose to kneel do so in a way that is non-burdensome for the rest of the congregation. Again, I agree with you. Besides the CDW end of this discussion, my only problem is that some people on this thread were trying to label all those who knelt as prideful, arrogant, not following Rome (which, whether or not you believe it to be correct, some are only kneeling because they think Rome has said it “completely appropriate”), following their own whims when the “kneeler” might feel that God wants them to kneel and that Rome has OK’d this. Most of the people I know who kneel (all do so in a parish that has a kneeling rail which is still being used despite the fact that neither the new or old bishop has said anything about it) wouldn’t go against Rome if their lives depended on it and all, for the most part, are incredibly humble and very well educated in the Faith folks.

At some point don’t you wonder why people are so concerned with what others are doing? We’re not talking about an abuse or sacrilege that hits you over the head.

I don’t know about all of you but I’m always looking at the floor in front of me so I’m not distracted by anything around me and I can pay better attention to Our Lord. Since I’m looking ahead I see the person’s feet in front of me and don’t trip on them if they kneel or bump into them. I’d say if you get so irate and judgmental about their interior motives of those that choose to kneel that you do the same.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Okay, I’ve been asked to weigh in here…I think the saying is “fools rush in where angels fear to tread…”

Here’s the deal, the posture for receiving communion in the United States is standing, and this is particular law. See the USCCB web site for the particular *Adaptations *that are included as particular law promulgated on April 25, 2002. Because this is particular law, only the competent authirity can change it. That authority is the Holy Father or the USCCB! The CDW does not have the authority (unless granted it by the Holy Father) to make a change to what has been promulgated.

Therefore, the letters from the CDW, while of great value in teaching that we must not deny communion to those who choose some other posture, carry no force of law. Any posture except standing is illicit in the United States. Clearly, one who is confined to a wheel chair or is bed ridden would not be challenged as being illicit because the Church never demands the impossible. However, those who choose to kneel, for whatever reason, are to be counseled on the reasons why standing is to used in the United States. This should *not *be done at communion time, but at some other convenient time.

As otm has pointed out, the problem is made more complex because of the intersection of so many different laws and authorities.

Deacon Ed

 

[bear06]

Deacon Ed:

Okay, I’ve been asked to weigh in here…I think the saying is “fools rush in where angels fear to tread…”

Here’s the deal, the posture for receiving communion in the United States is standing, and this is particular law. See the USCCB web site for the particular Adaptations that are included as particular law promulgated on April 25, 2002. Because this is particular law, only the competent authirity can change it. That authority is the Holy Father or the USCCB! The CDW does not have the authority (unless granted it by the Holy Father) to make a change to what has been promulgated.

Therefore, the letters from the CDW, while of great value in teaching that we must not deny communion to those who choose some other posture, carry no force of law. Any posture except standing is illicit in the United States. Clearly, one who is confined to a wheel chair or is bed ridden would not be challenged as being illicit because the Church never demands the impossible. However, those who choose to kneel, for whatever reason, are to be counseled on the reasons why standing is to used in the United States. This should *not *be done at communion time, but at some other convenient time.

As otm has pointed out, the problem is made more complex because of the intersection of so many different laws and authorities.

Deacon Ed

So, what you are saying is that even though the CDW says that “this Dicastery is competent to specify the manner in which the norm is to be understood for the sake of a proper application.” they don’t and we can’t take this statement at face value?

 

[bear06]

Deacon Ed:

Okay, I’ve been asked to weigh in here…I think the saying is “fools rush in where angels fear to tread…”

Here’s the deal, the posture for receiving communion in the United States is standing, and this is particular law. See the USCCB web site for the particular Adaptations that are included as particular law promulgated on April 25, 2002. Because this is particular law, only the competent authirity can change it. That authority is the Holy Father or the USCCB! The CDW does not have the authority (unless granted it by the Holy Father) to make a change to what has been promulgated.

Therefore, the letters from the CDW, while of great value in teaching that we must not deny communion to those who choose some other posture, carry no force of law. Any posture except standing is illicit in the United States. Clearly, one who is confined to a wheel chair or is bed ridden would not be challenged as being illicit because the Church never demands the impossible. However, those who choose to kneel, for whatever reason, are to be counseled on the reasons why standing is to used in the United States. This should *not *be done at communion time, but at some other convenient time.

As otm has pointed out, the problem is made more complex because of the intersection of so many different laws and authorities.

Deacon Ed

I forgot, what does the “authority of the Holy Father” constitute then?

 

[Deacon_Ed]

bear06:

So, what you are saying is that even though the CDW says that “this Dicastery is competent to specify the manner in which the norm is to be understood for the sake of a proper application.” they don’t and we can’t take this statement at face value?

No, once it’s promulgted as particular law it becomes something that requires legislation to change. The (name removed by moderator)ut from the CDW at that point becomes 'advisory." However, in this case, I think that this issue can be blown way out of proportion. Let me offer a little catechesis here. (This is not directed at you, but is simply general information).

Many American Catholics have adopted a particularly insidious form of Protestant theology and have approached the Mass as a “me and Jesus” relationship. The Catholic understanding, on the other hand, is that the Mass is a “we and Jesus” relationship. We come together in *corporate *worship as the Body of Christ present in a particular place at a particular time. The bishops, in asking for a common posture, are trying to reclaim this teaching. They recognize that kneeling was, for centuries (probably dating back to the 11th century) the normative posture for receiving communion in the Latin Church. However, that doesn’t work well with parishes that have no communion rail (and let’s not start on where that went or why).

Perhaps influenced by the Eastern Catholic Churches where standing to receive communion has always been the norm, they have choosen this posture to express the commual understanding of receiving communion. Those who choose to kneel, regardless of reason, are expressing a desire to be not part of the community, and this is where the bishops have asked the priests and deacons to do particular catechesis.

Deacon Ed

 

[bear06]

So there’s no difference in changing the legislation and interpreting how it’s to be applied? Why does the CDW say this? It seems awfully misleading to say this.

Those who choose to kneel, regardless of reason, are expressing a desire to be not part of the community

,

Right or wrong on the CDW end of this matter, I can’t agree with the above statement for all who kneel.

 

[Mysty101]

bear06:

So there’s no difference in changing the legislation and interpreting how it’s to be applied? Why does the CDW say this? It seems awfully misleading to say this.

,

Right or wrong on the CDW end of this matter, I can’t agree with the above statement for all who kneel.

Perhaps this could clarify a little more
Those who choose to kneel, regardless of reason, are expressing a desire to be not part of the community. The community is standing–you are kneeling–you are choosing to do something other than the community --it really doesn’t matter why you are making that choice or if the community is right or wrong. You are choosing to kneel when they are standing. You are choosing not to be a part of the standing community.

 

[Mysty101]

Deacon Ed:

We come together in *corporate *worship as the Body of Christ present in a particular place at a particular time. The bishops, in asking for a common posture, are trying to reclaim this teaching.
Deacon Ed

Deacon Ed,

Thanks again for the thorough explanation.

When you gave your full name to thet rude person who addressed you incorrectly, I did remember you a bit.

But to this day I do remember you saying something similar a gazillion years ago on a Prodigy board. I was all so proud of myself because I wanted to bow at some time when others were not (not sure which was correct). You said that the Liturgy is public worship, and we are to do as the Community does (not exact words, and of course not regarding an abuse). I never forgot that, and was so glad to see that emphasized in the Postures & Gestures bulletin.

I still sometimes e-mail Fr Amaro.–do you ever see him?

 

[Mysty101]

bear06:

At some point don’t you wonder why people are so concerned with what others are doing? We’re not talking about an abuse or sacrilege that hits you over the head.

Deacon Ed answered that far better than I ever could
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_1.gif

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Mysty101:

Deacon Ed,

Thanks again for the thorough explanation.

When you gave your full name to thet rude person who addressed you incorrectly, I did remember you a bit.

But to this day I do remember you saying something similar a gazillion years ago on a Prodigy board. I was all so proud of myself because I wanted to bow at some time when others were not (not sure which was correct). You said that the Liturgy is public worship, and we are to do as the Community does (not exact words, and of course not regarding an abuse). I never forgot that, and was so glad to see that emphasized in the Postures & Gestures bulletin.

I still sometimes e-mail Fr Amaro.–do you ever see him?

Fr. Amaro is now less than 50 miles away, and I haven’t seen him in nearly 8 years! I went up to Ontario to assist him one time at Mass, and then he was transferred to Baker or Barstow or some other desert town. He has since been transferred to Crestline (Lake Arrowhead/Big Bear region), but I haven’t been able to break away to see him. Serving two parishes does make it difficult.

I’m impressed that something I said stuck with you!

Deacon Ed

 

[Mysty101]

Deacon Ed:

I’m impressed that something I said stuck with you!

Deacon Ed

It was you who impressed me

Great to CU again

 

[bear06]

Mysty101:

Perhaps this could clarify a little more
Those who choose to kneel, regardless of reason, are expressing a desire to be not part of the community. The community is standing–you are kneeling–you are choosing to do something other than the community --it really doesn’t matter why you are making that choice or if the community is right or wrong. You are choosing to kneel when they are standing. You are choosing not to be a part of the standing community.

Sorry, I’d still disagree with you on this. You can’t know what a person is desiring lest they tell you. I can quite see why people think that the CDW has the authority over this issue since they say they do, I’d still hope those that don’t could be a little more charitable to those that think this which has pretty much been my beef the whole time.

If Deacon Ed is correct than it is illicit. If he is correct then the CDW is doing a heck of a job misleading folks to believe they have authority over this matter. Catechesis should be done but it doesn’t help to catechise people by telling them that they are proud, arrogant, etc.

I e-mailed my canon lawyer friend to see if he jive’s with Deacon Ed. It’s kind of funny to me that Catholic Answers wouldn’t answer the kneeling question and when I e-mailed my friend he didn’t respond either.

 

[Panis_Angelicas]

Deacon Ed:

However, that doesn’t work well with parishes that have no communion rail (and let’s not start on where that went or why).

Why not? We can’t acknowledge that many altar rails were ripped out of Catholic Churches, claiming that it was a mandate of Vatican II (which it was not) and forcing people to stand, or drop to the hard ground if they still wished to kneel? Even then, after 30 years, some people still knelt, and the bishops asked to make it law in the US that all stand.
Yet, even before giving it the force of law, the CDW insisted that those who choose to kneel be protected from imprudent actions OR refusal of Communion, and instructed the bishops to insert such a clause. Afterward, they repeatedly reprimanded and clarified and reinforced their interpretation of the norm, insisting that those who kneel are not to be imposed upon, nor accused of acting illicitly.

Those who choose to kneel, regardless of reason, are expressing a desire to be not part of the community, and this is where the bishops have asked the priests and deacons to do particular catechesis.

Deacon Ed

That is not the desire they are expressing, dear Deacon Ed; in fact that is the furthest thing from the minds of those who I know who kneel. They are profoundly humbled to be able to approach the Lord Jesus, Who condescends to be consumed by sinful man. It is humility and contrition which compels them to kneel, not a desire to separate themselves from the rest of the Community. They understand that it is not their posture which unites us all, it is reception of the Sacrament.

The rest of you can go on judging, accusing, complaining and whining all you like.

Why not bring stones to Mass and cast them at those who kneel, to express your dissatisfaction with their posture? It’s so much easier to cast stones here on an anonymous forum.

Oh, and perhaps the one among you who has the least sin can throw the next stone here.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Panis Angelicas:

Why not? We can’t acknowledge that many altar rails were ripped out of Catholic Churches, claiming that it was a mandate of Vatican II (which it was not) and forcing people to stand, or drop to the hard ground if they still wished to kneel? Even then, after 30 years, some people still knelt, and the bishops asked to make it law in the US that all stand.
Yet, even before giving it the force of law, the CDW insisted that those who choose to kneel be protected from imprudent actions OR refusal of Communion, and instructed the bishops to insert such a clause. Afterward, they repeatedly reprimanded and clarified and reinforced their interpretation of the norm, insisting that those who kneel are not to be imposed upon, nor accused of acting illicitly.

And the point I was making is that the CDW is offering *advice *along with the directive that a person who chooses to kneel cannot be denied communion. That is within the scope of their authority, and is, in my opinion, precisely correct. Only grave sinners are denied communion, and kneeling to receive is certainly not a grave sin. They can, however, be counseled on the reason for uniformity of posture. That is part of the particular law that the bishops of the United States have enacted. Personally, I’ve never done that because I don’t feel that it’s a significant enough violation (an action taken contrary to the norm) to worry about.

That is not the desire they are expressing, dear Deacon Ed; in fact that is the furthest thing from the minds of those who I know who kneel. They are profoundly humbled to be able to approach the Lord Jesus, Who condescends to be consumed by sinful man. It is humility and contrition which compels them to kneel, not a desire to separate themselves from the rest of the Community. They understand that it is not their posture which unites us all, it is reception of the Sacrament.

Actually, it is both. Yes, we are united primarily in the Eucharist. But if it were not for the fact that we are present at a corporate worship we could simply ask the priest to receive communion at any old time. We come as a body to receive communion and a uniformity of posture reinforces that unity.

The rest of you can go on judging, accusing, complaining and whining all you like.

Why not bring stones to Mass and cast them at those who kneel, to express your dissatisfaction with their posture? It’s so much easier to cast stones here on an anonymous forum.

Oh, and perhaps the one among you who has the least sin can throw the next stone here.

I’m not judging anyone. I am saying that they are making a person choice that is contrary to the wishes of their bishop. That is, they are choosing (for whatever reason) to sever that particular form of unity. This is really a statement of personal piety vs. corporate posture.

Deacon Ed

 

[Mysty101]

bear06:

Sorry, I’d still disagree with you on this. You can’t know what a person is desiring lest they tell you. I can quite see why people think that the CDW has the authority over this issue since they say they do, I’d still hope those that don’t could be a little more charitable to those that think this which has pretty much been my beef the whole time.

If Deacon Ed is correct than it is illicit. If he is correct then the CDW is doing a heck of a job misleading folks to believe they have authority over this matter. Catechesis should be done but it doesn’t help to catechise people by telling them that they are proud, arrogant, etc.

I e-mailed my canon lawyer friend to see if he jive’s with Deacon Ed. It’s kind of funny to me that Catholic Answers wouldn’t answer the kneeling question and when I e-mailed my friend he didn’t respond either.

I am not talking about licit or illicit or who has authority over whom–I am speaking of choosing to act in community. It does not matter what they desire–they are choosing not to be part of the community. If they chose to stand, they chose to be part of the commmunity—I really don’t understand how you can argue with that. If they desired to be part of a standing community, they would stand.

 

[ICXCNIKA]

Cherub:

I read this from the Catholic Answers Special Report: Liturgical Abuses

“The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.”

What does that mean exactly? What are the “reasons for this norm?”

What do we do with the guy in the wheel chair?

 

[bear06]

Deacon Ed:

Okay, I’ve been asked to weigh in here…I think the saying is “fools rush in where angels fear to tread…”

Here’s the deal, the posture for receiving communion in the United States is standing, and this is particular law. See the USCCB web site for the particular Adaptations that are included as particular law promulgated on April 25, 2002. Because this is particular law, only the competent authirity can change it. That authority is the Holy Father or the USCCB! The CDW does not have the authority (unless granted it by the Holy Father) to make a change to what has been promulgated.

Therefore, the letters from the CDW, while of great value in teaching that we must not deny communion to those who choose some other posture, carry no force of law. Any posture except standing is illicit in the United States. Clearly, one who is confined to a wheel chair or is bed ridden would not be challenged as being illicit because the Church never demands the impossible. However, those who choose to kneel, for whatever reason, are to be counseled on the reasons why standing is to used in the United States. This should *not *be done at communion time, but at some other convenient time.

As otm has pointed out, the problem is made more complex because of the intersection of so many different laws and authorities.

Deacon Ed

Hey Deacon Ed and Mysty,

I just looked at the Adaptations link you provided Deacon Ed, and adaptation 160 does not say that kneeling is illicit. The “illicit” quote that Mysty gave came from the BCL newsletter. I’m just guessing that the BCL newsletter isn’t considered law. 160, as accepted and approved by the CDW is here usccb.org/liturgy/girm/fil2.shtml

One other question I have for you Deacon Ed is, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the first sentence of the below statement is directive and the second is advice. Why do you say that it is not all directive?

“…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.”

Does anyone have the full text of this above letter?

Thanks!