Revoke the U.S. Indult on Standing for Holy Communion

[portarica]

If you want to receive kneeling and on your tongue, sit in the front row of the church where the priest brings the Eucharist down to the parishioners.

That works out well for my father in law . Give it a try.

Peace

 

[otjm]

You’re right. The issue is the defiance of local customs, and custom is the one thing the Church wants us to respect.

Are you suggesting that local customs trump the authority of both the bishops and Rome? Certainly there are those out there who do; Redemptionis Sacramentum tried to put an end to that and has not succeeded everywhere - particularly where those local customs run contrary to it.

 

[ChurchTorch]

It never ceases to amaze me how uncritical thinking tends to multiply itself unto cast-in-stone “truth”…

Great posting, especially this first sentence. A sentence that literally cannot be understood by some of the very people who are so quick to step into the role of apologist for the Church…

 

[ProVobis]

Great posting, especially this first sentence. A sentence that literally cannot be understood by some of the very people who are so quick to step into the **role of apologist **for the Church…

And who’s qualified to be that? :confused

It seems the post-Vatican II crowd has spawned off its own spinners of the faith, rationalizing everything they do to suit their own purpose. They’ll even use the Eastern Catholic Church or the early Church as examples to rationalize their present actions. Never mind CITH started with defiance of the sin of sacrilege, never mind they tossed out communion rails, never mind they turned the communion experience into a charismatic event, never mind all the scandals they’ve managed to hide, they got their they got their way and everyone should be happy about it. If you aren’t happy about their new love for the Church, it’s your problem, but they know what’s best for you.

 

[otjm]

And who’s qualified to be that? :confused

It seems the post-Vatican II crowd has spawned off its own spinners of the faith, rationalizing everything they do to suit their own purpose. They’ll even use the Eastern Catholic Church or the early Church as examples to rationalize their present actions. Never mind CITH started with defiance of the sin of sacrilege, never mind they tossed out communion rails, never mind they turned the communion experience into a charismatic event, never mind all the scandals they’ve managed to hide, they got their they got their way and everyone should be happy about it. If you aren’t happy about their new love for the Church, it’s your problem, but they know what’s best for you.

So now we move to the ad hominem attack? When one cannot refute the point, attacking the integrety of the speaker by calling them “post Vatican 2 crowd” (by the way, I am pre Vatican 2), and “spinners of the faith”, “rationalizing everything they do to suit their own purpose” implies that somehow there is some sort of subtle lie within the context of my statement.

To begin with, I am not “spinning” anything. The OP is correct that there has been a loss of reverence. I have nowhere disagreed with that; in fact I have said repeatedly that there has been a loss of reverence.

However, playing the post hoc, ergo propter hoc game is not getting at why there has been a loss of reverence; and blaming loss of reverence on standing for the Eucharist and CITH does just that. Further, it does not explain how this can be when the Eastern rites have stood to receive for centuries; nor does it explain the growth in Eucharistic adoration in parishes thriving with reverence, receiving standing and CITH.

That is not rationalization, it is critical thinking. You might try some; it can actually be refreshing. You are mad? I would suggest part of your being mad is that someone put a hole in your favorite balloon. Nowhere have I said anything about communion rails. Where they exist and the parish uses them, then that is what one is to do. And one can receive in reverence or irreverently at the Communion rail today just as much as one could do so years ago. If you think people were not irreverent then, I have bridge to sell you. The degree of irreverence was much lower, but kneeling was not the source of reverence then, it was caechesis - which in spite of your ad hominem attack I think even you would admit.

Nowhere have I said what is best for you. In fact, nowhere have I expressed an opinion as to whether I would prefer to receive standing or kneeling; your projections are simply figments of your imagination spining out what you think will justify your anger.

Get over your judgmentalism. Learn to listen to what people actually say rather than simply looking for someone to reinforce your opinions.

From other threads it is clear you prefer the EF. I applaud you for seeking a format of the Mass which works postively for your salvation and I am glad that the EF is available. I wish it were more available so that more could avail themselves of it. I have made no suggestion that it should be modified to suit me or anyone else nor do I have any agenda in that area. And while you are at it, you might ponder on the fact that there is growing Eucharistic Adoration and by far it is within parishes that have the OF, not the EF. Amazing how God can be worshiped by those you are so quick to denigrate.

 

[mick321]

It never ceases to amaze me how uncritical thinking tends to multiply itself unto cast-in-stone “truth”.

The presumption is made that standing for Communion is a cause of a loss of reverence for the Eucharist. It also presumes that where people have lost reverence, that will somehow be instilled by making them kneel.

The issue of loss of reverence is not caused by whether one stands or kneels for reception of Communion; the very fact that for ages upon ages in one or more Eastern rite Churches people have stood and maintained reverence should be at least a minor clue, if not a glaring searchlight and siren that the issue of lack of reverence lies somewhere else.

And how can I speak thus? Because I attend Mass in a parish in which everyone stands for reception, where the vast majority receive in the hand, and where reverence is strong - why? Because of catechesis. And part of that catechesis is the fact that for something like 12 to 15 years we have had 24 hour Perpetual Adoration.

One does not need to go petitioning the Bishops or the Pope for a change. One needs to address what the real problem is. And the real problem has absolutely nothing to do with standing or kneeling, or reception in the hand or on the tongue. It has to do with what people are taught, plain and simple, and what is modeled by the pastor and the parishoners. When reverence is modeled - done - by the leader of the parish - the pastor, and when the lay leaders of the parish model - do - the same, others pick up on it and do likewise. When reverence is taught and done, reverence is learned. When sloppy practice is done, much is observed and learned - all to the detriment.

When the Baltimore Catechism got tossed out and what parishes got was a touchy-feely-Jesus-is-my-buddy-we-all-have-to-love-one-another excuse for teaching the faith, people were no longer taught what the Church believes about the Eucharist. They were given pablum in place of the reality of the Eucharist, doctrine was dumbed down, and we now have two generations whose belief is hazy because they simply were not taught.

When you teach them the truth, it is amazing to see the change that takes place.

My parish is a shining example of the fact that it really does not matter whether one stands or kneels or whether one receives in the hand or on the tongue in regards to reverence. Reverence comes when one is taught the doctrine and sees the reverence expressed by others who beleive the same.

Making people kneel does not teach the doctrinal issues.

Teaching the doctrinal issues does not require a change of posture.

Posture is not the issue. Understanding of doctrine is the issue, and as usual, we are all rallying around the rabbit hole, missing the essential issue entirely.

Reverence is as reverence does. One can be reverent standing just as one can be irreverant kneeling, and vice-versa.

No presumptions here. Properly catechised Roman Catholics do not need to be ordered to kneel for Holy Communion. They already kneel.

In the Roman Catholic Faith, receiving communion in the hand from a standing posture is not the cause of loss of reverence. It is a manifestation of reverence long since lost.

Reverence is as reverence does. Even if your attorney assures you that an indult has been “granted” to allow spitting on the floor of courtrooms, your long-term interests may be better served by eliminating bodily fluids outside the view of the judge.

Stand in Eastern Rite Churches if you can. Rally around the indult if want. Spit on the floor of rabbit holes if you must. No petition required.

 

[otjm]

No presumptions here. Properly catechised Catholics do not need to be ordered to kneel. They already kneel.

Properly catechized Catholics know and understand that their bishop is their spiritual leader, and when the bishop legitimately sets standing as the norm, in humility they follow his rules.

In the Roman Catholic Faith, receiving communion in the hand from a standing posture is not the cause of loss of reverence. It is a manifestation of reverence long since lost.

Which is to presume that the bishops promote lack of reverence, and fails to answer my question - since reverence is clearly present in parishes with the OF, 24 Hour Perpetual Adoration, standing to receive, and CITH, it is obvious that it is there a manifestation of reverence. The issue still stands: loss of reverence is not due to standing; it is due to loss of catechesis.

Reverence is as reverence does. Even if your attorney assures you that an indult has been “granted” to allow spitting on the floor of courtrooms, your long-term interests may be better served by eliminating bodily fluids outside the view of the judge.

this could be categorized as a non-response, since standing to receive is not the equivalent of spitting on a courtroom floor. Nice red herring, proving nothing.

Stand in Eastern Rite Churches if you can. Spit on the floor of a rabbit hole if you must. No petition required.

OK, so the issue about the rabbit hole went over your head. You are correct; no petition is required.

It is interesting how much talk there is about the liberals, how stiff their backs are and how they pick and choose what rubrics they will follow, (all of which is true), and how incapable some are of looking in the mirror and identifying the same characteristics. Humility and obedience are such great characteristics when things run our way, and so easily discarded when “we know better”.

 

[malphono]

Properly catechized Catholics know and understand that their bishop is their spiritual leader, and when the bishop legitimately sets standing as the norm, in humility they follow his rules.

We’ve probably been down this road before, but the fact of the matter is that the universal norm in the Roman Church is still kneeling. Standing is also an option. The OF Missal and Redemptionis Sacramentum, etc, have been quoted several times in this thread, so there’s no need to do it again. The Local Ordinary can set whichever “norm” he wants, but kneeling remains an option that the Local Ordinary cannot trump. The same is true for COTT vs CITH.

Of course to me, personally, it’s all academic anyway. In Eastern and Oriental churches I stand, and in Roman churches I attend the EF so I kneel.

 

[otjm]

We’ve probably been down this road before, but the fact of the matter is that the universal norm in the Roman Church is still kneeling. Standing is also an option. The OF Missal and Redemptionis Sacramentum, etc, have been quoted several times in this thread, so there’s no need to do it again. The Local Ordinary can set whichever “norm” he wants, but kneeling remains an option that the Local Ordinary cannot trump. The same is true for COTT vs CITH.

Of course to me, personally, it’s all academic anyway. In Eastern and Oriental churches I stand, and in Roman churches I attend the EF so I kneel.

It is a road that is pretty well trod, and it is always interesting to see what gets said.

When I go to St Irene’s (Byzantine) I stabnd for Communion; when I got to St. Sharbel’s (Maronite) I stand; when I go to my parish (OF) I stand; when I go to Holy Rosary (OF, Dominican) I kneel at the Communion rail with everyone else. It really is not complicated, and there is reverence shown in each of the parishes.

Amazing how that works…

 

[ProVobis]

Of course to me, personally, it’s all academic anyway. In Eastern and Oriental churches I stand, and in Roman churches I attend the EF so I kneel.

In the OF I stand and in the EF I kneel, but I don’t do it (and I doubt if anyone else does it) because it’s the norm. We all do it because we see others do it and none of us want to be disruptive. I suppose if we had ushers to tell us otherwise, we’d all follow those instructions as well. That’s the way most of us are.

 

[mick321]

Properly catechized Catholics know and understand that their bishop is their spiritual leader, and when the bishop legitimately sets standing as the norm, in humility they follow his rules.

Which is to presume that the bishops promote lack of reverence, and fails to answer my question - since reverence is clearly present in parishes with the OF, 24 Hour Perpetual Adoration, standing to receive, and CITH, it is obvious that it is there a manifestation of reverence. The issue still stands: loss of reverence is not due to standing; it is due to loss of catechesis.

this could be categorized as a non-response, since standing to receive is not the equivalent of spitting on a courtroom floor. Nice red herring, proving nothing.

OK, so the issue about the rabbit hole went over your head. You are correct; no petition is required.

It is interesting how much talk there is about the liberals, how stiff their backs are and how they pick and choose what rubrics they will follow, (all of which is true), and how incapable some are of looking in the mirror and identifying the same characteristics. Humility and obedience are such great characteristics when things run our way, and so easily discarded when “we know better”.

Regardless what local mandarins allow, properly catechised Catholics know that they are never *required *to accept, advance or participate in the degradation of the sacraments or the practice thereof. [see: Renewal of Baptismal Promises]

 

[otjm]

Regardless what local mandarins allow, properly catechised Catholics know that they are never *required *to accept, advance or participate in the degradation of the sacraments or the practice thereof. [see: Renewal of Baptismal Promises]

And since the bishops are acting under the authority of Rome, one can be assured that they are doing nothing which would degrade the sacraments when they rule within their authority.

I find it interesting that you would refer to those in Apsotolic Succession, who are in concert with Rome and supporting the Magisterium as “mandrins”. A most telling statement. As Vicars of Christ, one would think that someone who professes to be a loyal Catholic would have a tad bit more respect for them.

 

[malphono]

In the OF I stand and in the EF I kneel, but I don’t do it (and I doubt if anyone else does it) because it’s the norm. We all do it because we see others do it and none of us want to be disruptive. I suppose if we had ushers to tell us otherwise, we’d all follow those instructions as well. That’s the way most of us are.

That is actually a very good point. It kind of takes this entire thread back to the beginning. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with standing vs kneeling for communion: it’s a matter of custom within the permitted norms. In the EF, the custom (and the norm) is to kneel. (In the East and Orient, it’s standing, but that has no bearing on the thread.) But in the OF, it can be either kneeling or standing. In the OF, if someone insists on kneeling where the local custom is otherwise, he is not to be denied; as I mentioned earlier, the Local Ordinary may establish a “norm” but cannot trump what is permitted universally. I suppose, too, that one could make the same argument in the OF if the local custom was to kneel and someone insisted on standing.

 

[mick321]

And since the bishops are acting under the authority of Rome, one can be assured that they are doing nothing which would degrade the sacraments when they rule within their authority.

I find it interesting that you would refer to those in Apsotolic Succession, who are in concert with Rome and supporting the Magisterium as “mandrins”. A most telling statement. As Vicars of Christ, one would think that someone who professes to be a loyal Catholic would have a tad bit more respect for them.

mandarin noun
mainly disapproving, an influential person; a member of an elite group who is sometimes considered to be too powerful

Authority of Rome? Apostolic Succession? In concert with Rome? Supporting the Magisterium? Are you including those so-called Vicars of Christ who were in the middle of the sexual abuse scandal? Before you are overwhelmed with respect and begin exchanging spit with those guys, perhaps you would care to answer this::

Were they acting under the authority of Rome when they ordered the destruction of communion rails and high altars? Have you seen the marble rail where you received your First Holy Communion ripped out of the floor with a forklift, dumped into the street and smashed with sledgehammers by foul-mouthed laborers?

You may find it useful to obtain a 1962 Missal, navigate your way to the Renewal of Baptismal Promises, and read the text aloud - in English if you prefer.

 

[Layman]

Funny how just about everything that might induce a sense of awe, especially in the ignorant, has been changed or removed:

Latin;
The prayers;
Vestments;
Altar rails;
Vested, male-only participants;
Kneeling to receive;
Ancient hymns;
Incense;
Ad-orientem;

Sometimes …

Statues and
Figurative stained glass windows, which illiterate people could understand.

Even the candles are now cheap, plastic fakes with oil-jars inserted.

So, of course, we need much more catechesis, because the new Mass isn’t up to the job. Is Jesus present in the Host? In the old rite, there’s no ambiguity in the presentation.

So where will this catechesis come from? My young relatives are getting something called ‘Alive-O’ instead of the catechism in school in Ireland.

I’m not sure that 1 in 100 Catholics under 40 years old today could name the entire 10 Commandments. Fewer still the 7 Deadly Sins, recite the Creed or state the 4 Last Things. As for Indulgences and the Brown Scapular? They’d know more about ‘New Age’ religions.

When schools and priests are failing to teach the catechism straight and the Mass is subject to local whims, where will people learn the terrible truths of their religion?

The jig us up. There’s nowhere to go, except ‘back to the future’.

PS: Had a thought. One obstacle to the return of the TLM is that the contrast with the Novus Ordo would be too jarring e.g.:

“Mummy, why is the priest facing away from us in the old Mass and towards us in the new?”,
"Mummy, why do we kneel to receive Communion at this Mass, when we don’t at the 10 O’ clock one?"
“Mummy, why isn’t Aunty Mary giving out communion/reading from the pulpit at this Mass?”
“Mummy, I like the old Mass, the people are quiet and the hymns are nicer!”.

 

[ProVobis]

Apsotolic Succession, who are in concert with Rome and supporting the Magisterium

Wasn’t Judas once a member of that Magisterium? Isn’t it possible he had quite a few descendants?

 

[Layman]

As Vicars of Christ, one would think that someone who professes to be a loyal Catholic would have a tad bit more respect for them.

I’ll start respecting them when they start respecting the Pope and the norms of the Mass.

As it is, I have bitter fun in playing ‘spot the ecumaniac’ with them.

 

[twopekinguys]

I have come into this thread very late, but i have done my best to read every point, and I would just like to add my 2 cents.

1. If the heirarchy of the Church has said it is OK to stand in order to receive Holy Communion, who am I to disagree? I figure they know alot more about it than I do.
2. I have found that if I am in my pew waiting my turn to receive the Eucharist, and I am in a prayerful state, contemplating about what I am about to receive, then I am not paying attention to what other people are, or are not doing while receiving. The same applies when I return to my pew after receiving.
3. I have also found that it is only irreverant, or wrong when someone else does it. Meaning, that just because someone doesn’t behave the exact way we “think” they should, doesn’t mean they are being irreverant. Reverance comes in all shapes and forms.

Like I said, it is just my 2 cents.

 

[Layman]

It’s a public, comunal, sacred rite. You or I might feel quite reverent as individuals, but what does that matter when the outer, symbolic acts, which define a ritual, have been so transformed?

I feel quite reverent at home praying. I could send out for an EMHC. But is that as beneficial as attending a sung TLM, where I humble myself publicly before the Lord and hopefully leave my pride in the narthex?

It’s simple:

Post-Vatican II, we now have a Church where this was impossible in most parishes up to recently, while this is highly possible, to varying degrees, depending on the tolerance of your Bishop. You think the local Bishop doesn’t know what the latter congregation is up to?

Pre the Motu Proprio you might have to travel to another country to hear the Easter Triduum in Latin. You can still go 100 miles, so you better have a car in good order.

What I think most clergy don’t ‘get’ is that if you insert populist and mundane elements into the Mass and remove sacred ones, you can’t then expect the congregation to have the same reverence as manfiest in the old rite. **You’ve actually removed ways for people to show their reverence e.g. COTT, kneeling, the priest facing the Crucifix and Tabernacle, etc. **

So you get something that’s more like a school recital, with ‘turns’ by members of the audience/congregation, in which people feel comfortable having a chat at the back before or even during Mass.

 

[otjm]

Wasn’t Judas once a member of that Magisterium? Isn’t it possible he had quite a few descendants?

No, since the apostle had not yet been authorized; his death occured before the Resurrection.

Further, it is not responsive to the issue, as the fact that some bishops may turn away from Christ does not mean that the decisions of the rest of them are infected by such defection.

But it was a rather nice try!