Scottish Archbishop bans kneeling during communion

[Alexander_Roman]

Maybe it is all a ploy to get out of office and onto the golf course faster.

You are GOOD!

Alex

 

[alwayslooking]

Alarmist and misleading title. Hopefully the OP was not baiting.

The Archbishop didn’t ban kneeling.
/thread

We can discuss his decision to speak for standing, and the ramifications of speaking for it, etc - but he didn’t ban kneeling.

I took the thread title from the title of the story in the news link. Very sorry if you find it misleading. I most certainly not bating, just alerting the members of this forum that we have brothers and sisters in Christ to pray for.

Please note that the title of the story in the link changed as I clicked on it this morning.

Again, apologies if you find it misleading. This seems to happen whenever I post. I should just quit.

 

[TheDoctor]

…he letter in its entirety can be read here

rcag.org.uk/documents/PastoralLetterontheNewTranslationoftheRomanMissal.pdf

O.K., someone check me here. I just read the letter and there is nothing in it about banning anyone from kneelding during communion. What the Archbishop does say is that it is preferable to stand and bow vs. genuflect but either is still acceptable. In fact, the letter says nothing specifically about the posture to receive.

OMG! Could this enture thread be much ado about nothing???

 

[TheDoctor]

I took the thread title from the title of the story in the news link. Very sorry if you find it misleading. I most certainly not bating, just alerting the members of this forum that we have brothers and sisters in Christ to pray for.

Please note that the title of the story in the link changed as I clicked on it this morning.

Again, apologies if you find it misleading. This seems to happen whenever I post. I should just quit.

Please don’t quit posting. Part of what makes this forum community such a great place to be a part of is that we challenge each other and drive to the truth, and learning makes us better.

For example, if you had not posted this thread and The Idiot had not posted the link I wouild not have read the letter so I would not have known what the Archbishop really said and I would have been unable to talk intelligently about this subject if it came up.

P.S. - Unfortunately, there are a number of members who do bait, especially in this forum. I did not see your thread that way at all, however this is a lesson to all of us to go to the source material first before rendering an opinion.

 

[Sirach2]

Tantum Ergo:

Like so many good men in very stressful positions, he is making the decisions he thinks are best. Even if we don’t agree with them, we need to be very careful that we are highly respectful of the office, and absolutely charitable to the man himself.

[sign] Well said. Thank you! [/sign]

Besides Idiot and this member, the other comments in this thread by *traditionalists *are disgraceful. I would really need to see a greater example of holiness with regard to respecting clergy, if ever I decided to become a trad, strictly speaking.

• Why do I get the feeling that some paper work in the Vatican is about to get moved to the top of the pile? Brendan
• Corki winks to this comment
• Maybe it is all a ploy to get out of office and onto the golf course faster. Alwayslooking
• Kumbaya on youtube - At Trent
• Warrenton rofls At Trent’s comment
• At least he’s on the way out - jmj1984
• On and on it goes, from California to Scotland! Bishops under the mistaken idea that they are gods, Rudolfo

 

[Brendan]

*]Why do I get the feeling that some paper work in the Vatican is about to get moved to the top of the pile? Brendan

Why the objection to my comment?

First of all it is humor, lighten up.

Secondly, If you keep track of episcopal appointments by the Vactican, there has been a strong trend on the behalf of the Congregation of Bishops to move on the resignations of bishops that make light of Vatican instructions.

This is not a ‘trad’ statement, but rather an observation that so called ‘liberals’ have noted, specifically the NC Reporter. They can hardly be described as ‘trads’.

 

[Warrenton]

, the other comments in this thread by *traditionalists *are disgraceful.]

What would someone expect me to write? That I think no one should kneel, or that I think people should stand for communion? I don’t, and I won’t.

Which is more disgraceful, saying people ought not kneel, or that they should?

 

[Te_Deum]

Sirach you really cannot blame us for our joy that His Grace Archbishop Mario Conti is leaving. I respect that he’s a bishop but… well… doesn’t it say much about him that his priests fear him rather than respect him?

 

[Te_Deum]

Secondly, If you keep track of episcopal appointments by the Vactican, there has been a strong trend on the behalf of the Congregation of Bishops to move on the resignations of bishops that make light of Vatican instructions.

I can assure you that certain Scottish bishops in the past have went a little further than simply “making light” of Vatican instruction.

 

[Warrenton]

In the United States, the USCCB has determined that a bow of the head should be the appropriate sign of reverence when approaching for Holy Communion. Other episcopal conferences have decided similar things. Consult your localized GIRM for more information.

The bowing of the head is somewhat new in my neck of the woods. Frankly, I am not sure what to make of it.

But if his Grace meant bowing of the head, why did he not just say so? The structure of his letter implies that there is some “more traditional” way of receiving communion than kneeling, or that kneeling is less traditional than standing during certain parts of the mass. Again, what ever does he mean? Is he going back to the middle ages when everyone in the cathedral stood, because there were no chairs? I suppose people just stood in the catacombs, too; nobody wanted to be tripping over the stools if the legionaries showed up. If that is what he meant, it seems to be stretching the point.

Looking at the letter from the merely rhetorical viewpoint, his Grace seems to be gently discouraging the practice of kneeling and suggesting, on the basis of his own expertise, that the traditional practices are not really so traditional, and that the newer way is more traditional. His Grace may be absolutely correct; but without specific reference to the practices, the reader is left to speculate. I would be surprised if the structure of the letter was accidental.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

Dropping to your knees, while people stand behind you, has NOTHING to do with reverence, and EVERYTHING to do with calling attention to YOU! YOU are attempting to show that YOU are more reverent, more pious, than all of the other people.

It identifies YOU as a Pharisee, one that has to publicly show how pious they are, but in reality are not following the rules of God at all. EXACTLY the kind of behavior that our Lord directly condemned.

For those that claim that receiving on their knees is more reverent, what position is the Priest in when HE receives Communion? If there are Con-Celebrants, what position are THEY in when THEY receive communion? They are STANDING.

If standing is less reverent, WHY DOES EVERY PRIEST IN THE WORLD RECEIVE THE EUCHARIST WHILE STANDING, WHEN THEY CELEBRATE THE MASS?

 

[Sirach2]

To those who are defensive of my post, I suppose this liberal modernist, as you may have pegged me, was raised with more respect for the clergy than trads. I was never taught that it is ok to ridicule, demean, or make a mockery of their office. It was confirmed in the O.T. readings of David toward evil King Saul, toward whom David never showed disrespect; and more recently by St. Catherine of Siena who received revelations from Christ about how he hates this “sin.” And if you will hear it, it is in the forum’s rules.

Take it for what it is - this is how an outside observer views your “humor.”

 

[NewsTheMan]

Dropping to your knees, while people stand behind you, has NOTHING to do with reverence, and EVERYTHING to do with calling attention to YOU! YOU are attempting to show that YOU are more reverent, more pious, than all of the other people.

It identifies YOU as a Pharisee, one that has to publicly show how pious they are, but in reality are not following the rules of God at all. EXACTLY the kind of behavior that our Lord directly condemned.

For those that claim that receiving on their knees is more reverent, what position is the Priest in when HE receives Communion? If there are Con-Celebrants, what position are THEY in when THEY receive communion? They are STANDING.

If standing is less reverent, WHY DOES EVERY PRIEST IN THE WORLD RECEIVE THE EUCHARIST WHILE STANDING, WHEN THEY CELEBRATE THE MASS?

I can only assume this is a satire post? It must be.

It is this misguided, liberal, irrational and gospel-twisting attitude which prohibits me from kneeling to receive Our Lord in my own parish.

 

[ProVobis]

In the United States, the USCCB has determined that a bow of the head should be the appropriate sign of reverence when approaching for Holy Communion. Other episcopal conferences have decided similar things. Consult your localized GIRM for more information.

As I read the article, I feel that perhaps the GIRM needs to be clarified or the Latin needs to be retranslated. The bishop only seems to be trying to follow the spirit (yes, the spirit) of the GIRM and, not that I agree with it, he does seem to have a legitimate point in that context.

That said, this (GIRM or its interpretation) does seem to be inconsistent with what the Vatican has said on the topic of KFC. But keep in mind one stipulation (per Cardinal Arinze’s youtube video) is that anyone is allowed to receive kneeling as long as he “doesn’t make a nuisance of himself.” That can be a problem.

 

[revert_jen]

Besides Idiot and this member, the other comments in this thread by *traditionalists *are disgraceful. If that is what it means to be a trad, I want no parts of your “holy tradition.”

…

• Kumbaya on youtube - At Trent
• Warrenton rofls At Trent’s comment
  …

How are the things above disgraceful? Granted that IMHO Joan Baez’ voice is extremely annoying (wobbling with a vibrato you could drive a truck through), it was a joke. It wasn’t even a particularly harsh joke. Most of the others were just jokes, too, and I imagine almost everyone realized it. I’m sure nobody really thinks that a Archbishop would come out against kneeling for Communion so he could play golf. It’s the absurdity (and of course the fact that it’s Scotland ) that makes it funny.

I have to agree that unfortunately Rudulfo’s post was lacking in charity. (Rules of the Road: Charity, particularly the part about people in their zeal correcting (among others) bishops)

OTOH, it isn’t particularly charitable to go into the Traditional Catholicism forum, refer to traditional Catholics as “trads,” and over-react to a couple of jokes. We all lack charity from time to time.

The real problem with this thread is that we are, once again, arguing about something that hasn’t happened. People are getting up in arms about the Archbishop having banned kneeling, when he hasn’t. I don’t blame the OP at all–it’s perfectly reasonable to use the title of the linked article, and I personally don’t know if it’s even possible to change the title of a thread when the title of an article changes. But if you read the article, it just says people are told they “should” receive standing. That’s not the same as “must.” And if he’d said anything more strong than that, I’m sure the CNA would have quoted it. Thanks to The Idiot for posting the link to the document, so people could be sure. But I think I have to agree with TheDoctor that it is much ado about nothing.

–Jen

 

[Te_Deum]

For those that claim that receiving on their knees is more reverent, what position is the Priest in when HE receives Communion?

Ignoring the rest of your post for the bile that it is I must admit that this is actually a good question. My only answer being that a) they’re priests and b) they make several acts of reverence during the Communion (at least in the EF). But it is an interesting question worthy of a closer look.

 

[Warrenton]

If standing is less reverent, WHY DOES EVERY PRIEST IN THE WORLD RECEIVE THE EUCHARIST WHILE STANDING, WHEN THEY CELEBRATE THE MASS?

Because the priest receives the communion in the person of Christ, and we are kneeling before him when this happens.

That said, I agree that kneeling can be over-pious. By the same token, not kneeling can be disrespectful. What is the proper approach to the Blessed Sacrament? No less a mind than St. Thomas Aquinas pondered that question. I don’t think you and I are likely to answer it definitively here!

We find ourselves in a situation where both choices come with separate sets of problems. That is why I, for one, advocate permitting both. While lacking the virtue of decisiveness, it does acknowledge the reality that at present, Catholics cannot agree. I do not blame Catholics for this inability. It is a function of the times we live in.

 

[Brendan]

To those who are defensive of my post, I suppose this liberal modernist, as you may have pegged me, was raised with more respect for the clergy than trads.

How exactly is it disrepectful of clergy for faithful to express a hope that Rome would take action to preserve the faithful implementation of it’s own instructions?

Is it disrespectful for one to wish that the appointed CLERGY in Rome would evaluate a sitution and take whatever action it deems to be good for the faithful of a diocese?

 

[ProVobis]

And GIRM means? And where do I find it?

General Instruction of the Roman Missal.

NB: that’s GENERAL as each parish has a different configuration as to kneeling accommodations, etc. The specifics would be left to the pastor, I would think.

As an aside, it’s good to remember that the 2002 GIRM also reiterates that Latin is to be used in the liturgy. Let’s hope all bishops try to implement this feature of the GIRM.

An, expanded edition of Jubilate Deo was later issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1987.
…
Its Latin selections, since they form a minimum repertoire of Gregorian chant, would allow us to finally fulfill the provision of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, which said that “steps should be taken enabling the faithful to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass belonging to them” (§54).

This is reiterated in the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM).

adoremus.org/JubilateDeo.html

 

[The_Idiot]

Since I was the first person to post the correct information allow me the courtesy of a few words here.

1. It is always wise to check before posting anything that comes from the Media be it Catholic or Lay - mistakes can be made.
2. It is always wiser to go to the Website of the Archdiocese / Diocese to see what the Hierarch actually said - and in this case it was very different from what had been reported.

NOWHERE has His Grace said he would prefer everyone to Receive Standing

What he** has** said is that they should bow or genuflect** BEFORE** Receiving .

This has become a storm in a teacup .