Receiving the Eucharist the reverant way....

[Rickwood]

Standing or kneeling? I only receive our Lord kneeling. I cannot or maybe even will not receive our Lord without humbling myself in His presence. I recently had to attend a N.O. Mass while on vacation. The Mass was reverent and done according to the rules as near as I could tell. When it came time to go for Holy Communion, I stayed in the pew. There were no provisions for kneeling so I made a Spiritual Communion. If the Church requires me to stand to receive Communion in order to be part of a common posture, then I will not receive.

What makes you personally believe that that kneeling is somehow “superior” to bowing/standing? That’s the first million dollar question. The second million dollar question is, what makes you believe the Church would set a norm that was in any way inferior to another posture/sign of reverence? It would be cool if people really pondered those two questions and listed the real reasons for their choices.

On a side note, when we receive holy communion is it a matter of showing reverence for the Blessed Sacrament or is it about “humbling myself in His presence?” The two are not necessarily synonymous. Not by a long shot.

Someone asked earlier, why did the bishops want the indult of standing and I have always wondered the same thing. Was it done to to show more respect to Our Lord, or was it done to speed up the “assembly line” and get the whole business done with in the shortest possible time.

“Standing” is not by indult in the USA. You’re simply misinformed there.

Have you ever really prayed on why the norm of standing was set in the USA? Have you ever really tried to understand the Church’s position? Your “assembly-line” comments speak volumes.

 

[benedictgal]

What makes you personally believe that that kneeling is somehow “superior” to bowing/standing? That’s the first million dollar question. The second million dollar question is, what makes you believe the Church would set a norm that was in any way inferior to another posture/sign of reverence? It would be cool if people really pondered those two questions and listed the real reasons for their choices.

On a side note, when we receive holy communion is it a matter of showing reverence for the Blessed Sacrament or is it about “humbling myself in His presence?” The two are not necessarily synonymous. Not by a long shot.

“Standing” is not by indult in the USA.

Rickwood, the fact remains that the CDWDS has assured the faithful that if they want to use the universal posture for kneeling, the Holy See has granted them their unconditional support. The posture of standing is one whose permission must be given by the Holy See, which it has done for the United States and other national episcopal conferences.

That being said, Rome has never, nor will it ever, abrogate the posture fo kneeling to receive Holy Communion. In fact, if anything, Cardinal Arinze’s Congregation still affirms and reaffirms this matter. What more affirmation do you need than that which the Holy Father, himself, has already given it?

Now, based on your logic, are you going to say that Pope Benedict is disobeying the USCCB if, at his next visit, he continues with his practice of having the communicants coming before him kneel in order to receive Our Lord? I would love for you to challenge him on that one.

 

[EasterJoy]

I’m sure there are some who would if they could, not to mention falling on their face in awe in the presence of God.

And no - I did not say this:

I said that the postures of standing and kneeling have the inherent connotation of pride or humility - in general. I said that I don’t understand why those who do not kneel have such major issue with those who do and consider it a “holier than thou” “show” of false piety.

Please read and understand clearly - words are important and they mean things as they are written.

~Liza

Words are important, yes. Re-read what you wrote!

You wrote (emphasis mine): "It’s pride, that’s what it is. When we are proud we stand, when we are humble we kneel and bow our heads." You didn’t write that the attitude of those who stand *seems *proud. You didn’t write that the postures, rather than the persons, were proud.You wrote nothing about connotation. Those qualifications are conspicuous in their absence. You wrote “It’s pride, that’s what it is”…or, to put emphasis on the words in question, “It is pride, that is what it is.” (To be fair, the contractions do take a little of the emphasis out, but not much. You were not so emphatic as you would have been had you done the underlining yourself, either.)

Your sentence construction is still rhetorically emphatic, though, because you chose repetition of the “is”, “are” and “when” within very simple sentences. We are proud or humble, and which we are at any given time (emphasized by your choice to repeat the word “when”) can be discerned, based on our outwardly discernible posture. Your repeated use of “is” and “are” emphatically indicate a state of being, not a state of seeming or an impression.

I can appreciate that you didn’t mean what you wrote, but you did write it. Now do you see what I mean?

 

[japhy]

“Prot. N. 47/03/L” through Mons. Mario Mariniin in no way viciates GIRM #160 in the USA.

I did not say GIRM 160 was “viciated” by the CDWDS’s statement.

To explain the reasons for the norm would necessitate explaining the importance of the norm. That goes without saying.

Yes, but you could explain the importance of the norm without stating its reason. You can say with something is important without knowing the reason behind it.

Why do some Catholics in the USA feel the need to ignore this norm for another sign of reverence/posture that they personally feel is more reverent? What exactly makes them feel that kneeling is more reverent than standing/bowing?

First, because standing requires a bow of the head (a sign of reverence), kneeling can be considered more reverent than standing. Second, because the Church freely gives them permission to “ignore this norm” and kneel.

Would they feel the same if kneeling was the norm, yet some insisted to stand and bow?

If the Church allowed it, I would not contest their right to do so.

 

[Rickwood]

…First, because standing requires a bow of the head (a sign of reverence), kneeling can be considered more reverent than standing. Second, because the Church freely gives them permission to “ignore this norm” and kneel…

The bowing/standing comes as a package…

In any event you have not shown how kneeling is more “reverent” than standing.

Another poster finds standing/bowing so deficient that it actually precludes him from receiving holy communion! That’s stunning to me. A Catholic finding a norm from the Church so deficient that it keeps him from receiving communion? How could that be?

 

[SnorterLuster]

What makes you personally believe that that kneeling is somehow “superior” to bowing/standing? That’s the first million dollar question. I thought I made that clear, I won’t do it. I didn’t say anything about it being superior, I only said that I won’t/can’t do it. I didn’t disrupt or make a scene, I just stayed in the pew. My soul is my responsibility. If a the community requires a certain posture for the sake of uniformity and I am unable to conform, then I will sit (or kneel)it out.
The second million dollar question is, what makes you believe the Church would set a norm that was in any way inferior to another posture/sign of reverence? I guess because I agree with our Pope. His Master of Ceremonies said that while the Pope holds the Communion in the hand and standing is acceptable, Communion on the tongue and kneeling promotes a more reverent attitude in the laity.

It would be cool if people really pondered those two questions and listed the real reasons for their choices.

On a side note, when we receive holy communion is it a matter of showing reverence for the Blessed Sacrament or is it about “humbling myself in His presence?” The two are not necessarily synonymous. Not by a long shot. I**n my mind, they are synonymous–or close enough for me. I understand my position in relation to God. I am certainly not His equal. Ever hear the words “Lord I am not worthy to have you enter my house, but only say the word & my soul will be healed.”

Just a quick question. If you are married, did you propose to your wife standing, or did you kneel in front of her and ask (beg) her to accept you?
**
“Standing” is not by indult in the USA.

 

[japhy]

Why do some Catholics in the USA feel the need to ignore this norm for another sign of reverence/posture that they personally feel is more reverent? What exactly makes them feel that kneeling is more reverent than standing/bowing?

In any event you have not shown how kneeling is more “reverent” than standing.

I have given one reason why a person who prefers to kneel “personally feel” it to be “more reverent” - kneeling requires no further sign of reverence. The fact that “standing and bowing are a package” implies that standing alone isn’t the level of reverence the Church desires for a person receiving Communion.

My second reason was why the those people feel they can “ignore” the norm.

You asked a subjective question, you’ll get a subjective answer.

And yes, standing is not via “indult”. But it is only allowed with a stipulation regarding kneeling.

 

[Frosty]

Kneeling is the universal norm. Standing was granted via petition by the national episcopal conferences and this was granted recognitio by Rome.

.

That is not exactly an accurate statement. Accordig to the GIRM:

Universal Norm

From the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 3rd edition, March 2002.

The following norm is the universal norm found in the Roman Missal. Note that each Bishop Conference determines the particular norm for its own country. By the general law, each adaptation is then submitted to the Holy See for recognition.

160 The priest then takes the paten or ciborium and goes to the communicants, who, as a rule, approach in a procession.

The faithful are not permitted to take up the consecrated bread or the sacred chalice themselves, and still less hand them on to one another. The faithful may communicate either standing or kneeling, as established by the Conference of Bishops. However, when they communicate standing, it is recommended that they make an appropriate gesture of reverence, to be laid down in the same norms, before receiving the Sacrament.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_posture.htm

So, according to the Congregation for Divine Worship, there is no ONE universal norm. Every national Conference of Bishops determines which it is to be in their country.

Does anyone know when the posture of kneeling for Communion began? Considering that the majority of the old Romanesque, Gothic and Baroque Cathedrals didn’t originally have either seats or communion rails, and that most of the faithful usually only received Communion once a year, at Easter, until Pope St. Pius X urged that the faithful receive on a regular basis, I wonder just how old this tradition really is?
If the Pope and the Bishops decided that kneeling and recieving on the tongue was to become mandatory once again, I would embrace it. Until that day comes, I’ll obey my Bishop.

 

[ethelzguy]

The bowing/standing comes as a package…

In any event you have not shown how kneeling is more “reverent” than standing.

Another poster finds standing/bowing so deficient that it actually precludes him from receiving holy communion! That’s stunning to me. A Catholic finding a norm from the Church so deficient that it keeps him from receiving communion? How could that be?

The misguided notion that they laity is qualified to judge the norms and/or indults of the Church.

 

[Rickwood]

…I thought I made that clear, I won’t do it. I didn’t say anything about it being superior, I only said that I won’t/can’t do it…

You find the Church’s norm for the USA so defective that it keeps you from receiving Holy Communion? That’s mind-boggling to me. In all sincerity exactly what sort of process made you reach this decision?

If I ponder this a bit I can only see where you could claim some sort of direct revelation through prayer (which would be amazing, considering it would contravene an existing Church norm)

…My soul is my responsibility. If a the community requires a certain posture for the sake of uniformity and I am unable to conform, then I will sit (or kneel)it out…

Are you actually suggesting that you could place your eternal soul in jeopardy by following a Church norm for the USA? (I don’t mean to ask a loaded-question. If you mean something else, please elucidate, but that appears to be what you are saying.)

…I guess because I agree with our Pope. His Master of Ceremonies said that while the Pope holds the Communion in the hand and standing is acceptable, Communion on the tongue and kneeling promotes a more reverent attitude in the laity…

So? No where has the Pope ever suggested the norm for the USA is in any way inferior to what you prefer. It’s impossible for me to believe he could feel that way without executing a change.

In my mind, they are synonymous–or close enough for me. I understand my position in relation to God. I am certainly not His equal. Ever hear the words “Lord I am not worthy to have you enter my house, but only say the word & my soul will be healed.”

Showing reverence is not akin to humbling oneself. That’s not true.

 

[Rickwood]

The misguided notion that they laity is qualified to judge the norms and/or indults of the Church.

One has to often laugh out loud here and in real life at self-proclaimed experts who feel they and only they have the correct interpretation of Church documents. It’s easy to fall into that trap…

 

[MDK]

yes, you should defiantly show reverance in the heart, but as a christian, do you just believe in and love God in the heart, or do you also show it? i can’t say i respect someone and not show it

Yes, like faith and works. Works confirms faith, and if we don’t have the corresponding outward action, do we really have true faith?

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Kneeling is the universal norm. Standing was granted via petition by the national episcopal conferences and this was granted recognitio by Rome.

BG,

We’ve been through this many times. The universal norm is “standing or kneeling, according to the instructions of the local bishops’ conference” Please stop misleading

Lux

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

That is not exactly an accurate statement. Accordig to the GIRM:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_posture.htm

So, according to the Congregation for Divine Worship, there is no ONE universal norm. Every national Conference of Bishops determines which it is to be in their country.

.

Thank you Frosty,

I posted before I saw your response.

Lux

 

[Digitonomy]

The limited permission that Pope Paul VI gave was dragged out of him under force and deceitful conditions.

I’ve heard this kind of claim before.

The reigning Pope, Saint Paul VI, is the innocent victim of freemasonry and communism which actually govern the Church. The Pope is kept under drugs, he is a prisoner within the walls of the Vatican, unable to do or decide anything save what the enemies of the Church ordain.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

First of all, unless you are a bishop or a priest, you are not a Eucharistic Minister. You are an Extraordniary Minister of Holy Communion. since you do not confect the Sacrament

The issue with your post is that the real issue involves employing EMHC when there is a genuine need and not merely to shorten the dstribution of Holy Communion, let alone teh Mass time. Using EMHCs are the exception, rather than the rule.

Putting aside the EM/EMHC discussion which always comes up in these matters, the OP was referring to kneeling/mouth vs standing/hand methods. That is what I was responding to, and both methods are acceptable and neither one is more “reverent” than another. I have never seen anyone kneel for communion at any recent mass I have been at. Daily masses have a higher ration of people choosing the mouth way than the hand way then weekend masses, yet if you watch the people walking up for communion, you cannot say that one group is more or less reverent than another based on the style they choose to receive with.

 

[SnorterLuster]

You find the Church’s norm for the USA so defective that it keeps you from receiving Holy Communion? That’s mind-boggling to me. In all sincerity exactly what sort of process made you reach this decision? It’s really quite simple. The Host is the Body and Blood of Christ. He deserves every bit of reverence that I can muster. I also don’t receive Holy Communion without fasting for at least three hours, nor will I receive with a mortal sin on my soul. I likewise will not receive if I am angry or agitated. Our Lord deserves the very best I can give him. If the Church says I don’t have to do that much, fine. I will continue to doing the very best that I can. If you are telling me that the norm is as good as you can do for Our Lord, fine.

If I ponder this a bit I can only see where you could claim some sort of direct revelation through prayer (which would be amazing, considering it would contravene an existing Church norm) No revelation, just the observation for you that the Church only requires you receive Holy Communion during the Easter season. I am not sinning nor shunning Our Lord by trying to be as good as I can be before receiving HIm. Wasn’t there something in the Bible about offering your best for a sacrifice to God? One brother offered his best lamb and God was pleased. The other brother offered weedy grain and God was displeased.

Are you actually suggesting that you could place your eternal soul in jeopardy by following a Church norm for the USA? (I don’t mean to ask a loaded-question. If you mean something else, please elucidate, but that appears to be what you are saying.) ** I certainly could place my soul in jeopardy by following the norm on receiving Him. I am weak. If I don’t have the discipline everytime to give my best, I will fall into the trap of believing that not my best is good enough for Him. You apparently aren’t as weak as I am, but I need to be vigilant because I am an easy mark for bad habits.**

So? No where has the Pope ever suggested the norm for the USA is in any way inferior to what you prefer. It’s impossible for me to believe he could feel that way without executing a change. Try googling the news stories from about a month ago when the MC for the Pope announced that he “requesting” that no one approach him for Holy Communion if they weren’t prepared to kneel and receive on the tongue.

Showing reverence is not akin to humbling oneself. That’s not true.

Since you addressed all my statements, but not my question, may I assume that you are married and got on your knees to ask your wife to marry you? You don’t have to admit it if you don’t want to.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

First of all, unless you are a bishop or a priest, you are not a Eucharistic Minister. You are an Extraordniary Minister of Holy Communion. since you do not confect the Sacrament

The issue with your post is that the real issue involves employing EMHC when there is a genuine need and not merely to shorten the dstribution of Holy Communion, let alone teh Mass time. Using EMHCs are the exception, rather than the rule.

It is not up to you to make these decisions. It is up to the Pastor, and for all the “expert” postings around here, I have never heard of a Pastor lessening the number of EMHC because he was given an oficial instruction.

Lux

 

[btdn]

I’ve heard this kind of claim before.

(As a reminder to everyone, see a notice from the moderators. Moving on…)

Fludgecow101 didn’t make any claim like that and I do not think that this was at all a fair characterisation of their post. I really do not think that Fudgecow meant that Servant of God Paul VI was physically assaulted.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Since you addressed all my statements, but not my question, may I assume that you are married and got on your knees to ask your wife to marry you? You don’t have to admit it if you don’t want to.

Ah now we compare a woman to Our Savior—actually I’ve never heard of anyone bowing to propose----far more reverent, than secular affection, but kneeling would not be considered too reverent.

Lux