Reverence vs Rights

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Hi again,

We do have many opinions on both sides.

I still feel that the permission granted to ignore the norm is somewhat confusing, and makes a Pastors job more difficult. As I said, I have not heard of any instance where any action was taken against a priest or bishop who requested a person to stand, especially when they were already instructed.

I still agree that kneeling is fine, if there are provisions, and/or the Pastor does not object to acting out of conformity.

Again my original question is still –

Does anyone think that a person who desires to kneel for Communion should remain kneeling, if the priest tells him/her to stand?

Or is it better to find a place where kneeling is accommodated, or stand as told, and discuss or make a complaint afterward?

Does a Pastor have the right to request a uniform posture for HC?

Lux

 

[fix]

No, it’s just unexpected. Have you ever had a child come to a dead halt in front of you when you’re moving forward in the communion line? I have, and were it not for being able to grab onto a pew I would have fallen on top of said child.

If people walked up to a communion rail and knelt it would be simple. But when there’s no communion rail – and when we’ve been told by our bishops, as approved by Rome, that our common posture at that time is to stand – it’s a problem.

As you state unexpected things happen. Children, elderly, handicapped, all types of impediments that we have to watch for. Not really a problem, unless we are looking to find them as problems.

I keep wondering why people bring up “rights” in terms of the Mass. Demanding one’s rights seems a strange way of worshipping one who is meek and humble of heart. Humility is such a difficult virtue to attain. I think it’s easier to choose when to be humble. “I’ll show my humility by kneeling to receive communion” may be easier for some people than “I’ll show my humility by following the instructions of those who have authority over me.”

I think the rights issue comes up as a response to those who use the GIRM as a cudgel. Catholics do have rights. Imposing upon people who kneel is not one such right.

The question really is not why do rights come up here. The question should be why do we find kneeling a problem when it is so much a part of our Catholic way of doing things?

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

So then — by what you say —a case can be made against having children and adults (under a certain height) walking in the communion line. After all --they can “stop suddenly” causing the one behind to trip over them.

My last comment before unsubscribing from this thread.

There’s a difference between a child who accidentally causes a problem and an adult who does it deliberately.

Blessings to you…

 

[fix]

I still feel that the permission granted to ignore the norm is somewhat confusing, and makes a Pastors job more difficult. As I said, I have not heard of any instance where any action was taken against a priest or bishop who requested a person to stand, especially when they were already instructed.

IMO, it is seen as confusing because we fail to accept the higher authority. I have asked several times to posters why did the Cardinal, and other others, ask Rome for clarification if the answer given by Rome is to be thought of as a lesser authority or to be marginalized?

Does anyone think that a person who desires to kneel for Communion should remain kneeling, if the priest tells him/her to stand?

I would think that the answer is both may be wrong.

Or is it better to find a place where kneeling is accommodated, or stand as told, and discuss or make a complaint afterward?

IMO, yes I would stand and seek clarification later.

Does a Pastor have the right to request a uniform posture for HC?

Sure, as long as kneeling is not forbidden.

 

[Walking_Home]

My last comment before unsubscribing from this thread.

There’s a difference between a child who accidentally causes a problem and an **adult who does it deliberately.
**
Blessings to you…

---

You are accusing a person – of kneeling with the intent to cause another to trip.

 

[benedictgal]

Hi again,

We do have many opinions on both sides.

I still feel that the permission granted to ignore the norm is somewhat confusing, and makes a Pastors job more difficult. As I said, I have not heard of any instance where any action was taken against a priest or bishop who requested a person to stand, especially when they were already instructed.

I still agree that kneeling is fine, if there are provisions, and/or the Pastor does not object to acting out of conformity.

Again my original question is still –

Does anyone think that a person who desires to kneel for Communion should remain kneeling, if the priest tells him/her to stand?

Or is it better to find a place where kneeling is accommodated, or stand as told, and discuss or make a complaint afterward?

Does a Pastor have the right to request a uniform posture for HC?

Lux

\

First of all, I think that you do have a problem understanding what the Holy See has resoundingly and repeatedly noted. First of all, kneeling to receive Holy Communion is a universal norm. Inasmuch as the USCCB received permission to have standing as a norm for the United States, it does not, repeat, does not, relegate kneeling to some sort of permissive posture.

Furthermore, the fact that Rome has stated that the communicant should not be denied Holy Communion because he chooses to receive Our Lord kneeling and on the tongue should be enough to put that debate to rest. The priest, nor the bishop, for that matter, has the right to abrogate what the Holy See has already said was perfectly legitimate.

Lux, what are you trying to get at with this thread? The Holy See has already given a definitive answer. You claim to not have a problem with kneeling, but, the fact that you keep raising the issue indicates that there is somethng deeper going on here. You claim that you don’t have an issue, but, you are characterizing people who choose to exercise the universal norm as either being defiant or as something else. You may not say it in your posts, but, the tone is certainly giving me the impression that this where you are heading.

I asked you this question in another thread, but, you never answered. So, I repeat: If Pope Benedict blesses the US with his presence again, and, he has his communicants come before him and kneel to receive Our Lord on the tongue, are you then saying that he is guilty of disregarding the US norm simply becuase of what he is doing?

Think about it.

 

[fix]

I’m not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but I think it is something important to keep in mind.

Many of the “liberals” look at this issue as an area where the “traditionals” are being hypocritical. They see the “traditionalists” being so adamant about their right to kneel to receive Communion, yet at the same time they’ll rail against the “liberals” for receiving in the hand, or for having altar girls or EMHC’s, or for celebrating Mass in the vernacular, or other such things that the Church allows.

Now, is this an unfair caricature? Absolutely. I am sure that not everyone who prefers to kneel feels that way about the other issues. But this is how it often comes across to those on the other side of the fence.

Is this a good enough reason not to kneel? Maybe, maybe not. I’ll let you decide.

I understand your point, but they should find a better case to make than that of kneeling of all things.

I cannot get over anyone would find kneeling to receive as disobedient or wrong. To me it is a symptom of a much deeper issue.

 

[nightwalker]

EasterJoy, thank you for your post, it is good to see some more common sense on this issue.

just two little things:

I don’t think the faithful have a right to kneel when receiving Holy Communion.

Rome has said that the faithful have a right, and that document has been posted in full.

Well, yes, it is not our business, but it certainly is the business of the bishop. As the catechism instructs, “liturgical services are not private functions, but are celebrations of the church.” The faithful do not have a right to each throw in their own little piece of pious chaos, in order to make the liturgy suit themselves. Still, when it is a minor thing, it is good to overlook it, as you suggest. I would hope others overlook my failures, well-meaning or not, in the same way.

Absolutely, but the bishop (or the conference) does not have the authority to forbid that which a higher authority permits.

God Bless

 

[Lee_M]

Essentially, the two go hand in hand. I cannot tell you how many times a priest or EMHC has seemed shocked and confused when I present my tongue. And this article is not about hand v. tongue per se.

And when is kneeling “dangerous”?

First of all, I can’t imagine that a priest would be shocked to give communion on the tongue. We have several people to receive communion on the tongue in our small rural parish. If the priest or EMHC are shocked, it must be a rare occurance with your diocese. Second, kneeling can be dangerous if the church is not set up for it. Someone could easily trip. I don’t see anything wrong with kneeling if the church had kneelers but in smaller rural churches, it could become a hazard if they were not setup for someone kneeling. There are just not that many people that kneel in the U.S. and it could cause confusion.

I repeat, I’m not against kneeling. If the churches here went back to kneeling tomorrow, I would be fine with it. It is just not the norm right now.

 

[ethelzguy]

If Pope Benedict blesses the US with his presence again, and, he has his communicants come before him and kneel to receive Our Lord on the tongue, are you then saying that he is guilty of disregarding the US norm simply becuase of what he is doing?

Think about it.

When the Pope distributes the Blessed Sacrement, he does so through the use of a kneeler or Communion rail, as I understand it.

Putting a kneeler out for communicants or using a rail is one thing. Somebody dropping to the floor at the head of a line of “standing, receiving in hand” communicants is a horse of a different color.

 

[Walking_Home]

When the Pope distributes the Blessed Sacrement, he does so through the use of a kneeler or Communion rail, as I understand it.

Putting a kneeler out for communicants or using a rail is one thing. Somebody dropping to the floor at the head of a line of “standing, receiving in hand” communicants **is a horse of a different **color.

---

Only to those willing to use any type of canard to impose upon those who kneel.

 

[Badaliyyah]

---

Only to those willing to use any type of canard to impose upon those who kneel.

if you go to an Anglican Use parish, walk up to the altar rail and remain standing for no reason other than you like to stand, you are just as strange as if you attend a parish where the priest comes out, a line forms and you drop to your knees. Technically it may be true that you can receive that way, but who cares really?

 

[benedictgal]

First of all, I can’t imagine that a priest would be shocked to give communion on the tongue. We have several people to receive communion on the tongue in our small rural parish. If the priest or EMHC are shocked, it must be a rare occurance with your diocese. Second, kneeling can be dangerous if the church is not set up for it. Someone could easily trip. I don’t see anything wrong with kneeling if the church had kneelers but in smaller rural churches, it could become a hazard if they were not setup for someone kneeling. There are just not that many people that kneel in the U.S. and it could cause confusion.

I repeat, I’m not against kneeling. If the churches here went back to kneeling tomorrow, I would be fine with it. It is just not the norm right now.

But, the communicant has the right, and Rome has ratified it and re-ratified it, to kneel and receive Holy Communion on the tongue. Kneeling is universal. Think about it. In missionary territories, prior to the Council, do you think they knelt on a kneeler or at the rail? If the church wasn’t built, you can rest assured that they knelt on the floor.

It doesn’t matter if you use the kneeler, the altar rail or the floor, the point is that you can kneel if you want to do so.

 

[Walking_Home]

EasterJoy, thank you for your post, it is good to see some more common sense on this issue.

just two little things:

Rome has said that the faithful have a right, and that document has been posted in full.

Absolutely, but the bishop (or the conference) does not have the authority to forbid that which a higher authority permits.

God Bless

---

Exactly nightwalker. This is a response from a canon lawyer to a question (When Rome and bishops disagree) on posture after Holy Communion. The same principle applies to kneeling for communion. When two authorities are at odds (some bishops vs. Rome) —We as Catholics are obligated to follow the higher authority–that being Rome-who has given full freedom and upheld the right to kneel.

.
ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=517538&Forums=9&Experts=0&Days=2008&Author=&Keyword=kneel&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=5&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=

Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 10-20-2007:

When two authorities are at odds, one is obligated to follow the higher authority.

You are correct on your reading of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. This document contains the norms for the celebration of the Mass. The Code of Canon Law contains very few directives regarding the Mass specifically.

There was also an official response from the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments that said that people are not obligated to remain standing after Holy Communion.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

First of all, I think that you do have a problem understanding what the Holy See has resoundingly and repeatedly noted. First of all, kneeling to receive Holy Communion is a universal norm. Inasmuch as the USCCB received permission to have standing as a norm for the United States, it does not, repeat, does not, relegate kneeling to some sort of permissive posture.

This is exactly what is noted about many who choose to stand—their attitude. Have I ever spoken to you in that manner? I was tempted to respond in kind, after giving up on my resolution to ignore you, but I won’t.

For the umpteenth time, the universal norm is what the bishops conference instruct. The Pope, himself has said that his preference takes nothing away from other legitimate postures.

You don’t need to repeat your misinterpretation of what I have posted. It won’t make it any more correct.

Lux, what are you trying to get at with this thread?

I think my posts are qute clear. You are free to respond or ignore, as you choose.
Think about it.

Lux

 

[ethelzguy]

Inasmuch as the USCCB received permission to have standing as a norm for the United States, it does not, repeat, does not, relegate kneeling to some sort of permissive posture.

If something is the “norm”, then something other than said norm, which may be permitted is WHAT then, if not “permissive”?

 

[Lee_M]

But, the communicant has the right, and Rome has ratified it and re-ratified it, to kneel and receive Holy Communion on the tongue. Kneeling is universal. Think about it. In missionary territories, prior to the Council, do you think they knelt on a kneeler or at the rail? If the church wasn’t built, you can rest assured that they knelt on the floor.

It doesn’t matter if you use the kneeler, the altar rail or the floor, the point is that you can kneel if you want to do so.

Did I ever say that the communicant didn’t have the right? I stated that it can be dangerous if someone is kneeling without an altar rail or kneeler? In tiny churches like mine, it would present a hazard to others. If an elderly person tripped and fell over the communicant, it can seriously injure the elderly person. No one said a communicant didn’t have the right to kneel. That has been established. However, it is not the NORM here in the U.S. I know it is the norm in other places, but it is NOT the norm here. It can cause confusion and can be dangerous and that is a valid argument.

Repeat, I’ll say it again. I’m not against kneeling. If someone wishes to kneel, by all means go for it and I’m not going to judge them either way. However, I believe in obedience to my bishop and my pastor. If they requested that I follow the norms of the missal, then I would respect their wishes especially if it was a safety issue. Just because a person has a right to do something, it doesn’t always make it the best option. People have the right to not be charitable to others, but it wouldn’t be the best choice to make.

 

[PKinsale]

If a priest threatens to withhold Communion unless I stand, I would stand. I will then talk to him about it afterwards, and the bishop. If there is not public clarification from the pastor (since his action is public) that he was wrong, I will go to the Catholic media.

I would also find another parish. There is no requirement to stick with one’s neighborhood church.

This is not a big issue for me personally, as I stand when I receive, but the right of others to kneel is a big issue to me. If “kneeling” is dangerous it is because others make it so by not paying attention.

Another thing: I submit (and others have argued) that turning Communion into a formal procession of the congregation has helped pressure some in the pew to receive when they otherwise should not.

Interestingly, the “progressive” parishes like to talk about how inclusive they are … except when it comes to social deviants who like to kneel.

 

[Lee_M]

If a priest threatens to withhold Communion unless I stand, I would stand. I will then talk to him about it afterwards, and the bishop. If there is not public clarification from the pastor (since his action is public) that he was wrong, I will go to the Catholic media.

I would also find another parish. There is no requirement to stick with one’s neighborhood church.

This is not a big issue for me personally, as I stand when I receive, but the right of others to kneel is a big issue to me. If “kneeling” is dangerous it is because others make it so by not paying attention.

Another thing: I submit (and others have argued) that turning Communion into a formal procession of the congregation has helped pressure some in the pew to receive when they otherwise should not.

Interestingly, the “progressive” parishes like to talk about how inclusive they are … except when it comes to social deviants who like to kneel.

I believe the topic of this forum wasn’t about the right to kneeling. It has been established that you cannot be denied communion for kneeling. Also this topic is not about which posture is better. It is about whether one should use their right to not follow the GIRM or should they respect the priests and bishops requests to follow the norm that is established in the GIRM.

 

[Joe_5859]

This is not a big issue for me personally, as I stand when I receive, but the right of others to kneel is a big issue to me. If “kneeling” is dangerous it is because others make it so by not paying attention.

I get what you’re saying here, but, for the sake of looking at both sides, one could also say that they would rather spend their time in the Communion line praying rather than wondering whether the person in front of them will drop to their knees (thus thrusting their feet backwards).

I think your point only works to a certain extent. Yes, people should pay attention. But what if you have an elderly person behind you? A small child? A tall, spaced-out clumsy person (like myself)? Maybe (okay…definitely) other people are more coordinated than I am, but I simply could not take that chance.