Those who always kneel for Holy Communion

[Mysty101]

Thanks Marie,

That is exactly my point, and you said it beautifully.

Perhaps many who prefer to kneel do not come from a large, overcrowded, understaffed Parish. Rome does not have this problem.

 

[pgoings]

Let’s see what happens when it [the TLM] gets as crowded as some NO Parishes

Mysty,

The flaw in your argument here is that forty years ago when the TLM was still in force,* ten times* as many people were going to Mass on Sunday, and going to Holy Communion. And this without any Sunday Masses on Saturday evening. So it** can** work, because it** has** worked.

–Paul

 

[Mysty101]

Mysty,

The flaw in your argument here is that forty years ago when the TLM was still in force,* ten times* as many people were going to Mass on Sunday, and going to Holy Communion. And this without any Sunday Masses on Saturday evening. So it** can** work, because it** has** worked.

–Paul

Sorry, I do not agree. I was a very young child, but I never remember the Mass being as crowded as it is today. Also many more people walked to Church, so you didn’t need the extra time between masses to get the cars in and out of the parking lot. Also I remember four priests distributing Holy Communion—now you have one.

And you still haven’t addressed the problem of the large number of people who have great difficulty in kneeling. Years ago they stayed home. Now with all the cars, they can get to Mass.

 

[pgoings]

Sorry, I do not agree. I was a very young child, but I never remember the Mass being as crowded as it is today.

I don’t know when you were born, but the much larger attendance did exist prior to (say) 1960. This is a demonstrable fact. When were you a young child?

Also many more people walked to Church, so you didn’t need the extra time between masses to get the cars in and out of the parking lot.

You can’t be serious?!? Even if this were true–which I doubt–you could just start earlier in the day; sure, people might object, but it’s hardly martyrdom. Or they could just start walking again, or taking public transport (which would be good stewardship as well).

Also I remember four priests distributing Holy Communion–now you have one.

Since there is now provision for E.M.H.C.'s (is that the correct term, per R.S.?), this is not an issue.

And you still haven’t addressed the problem of the large number of people who have great difficulty in kneeling. Years ago they stayed home. Now with all the cars, they can get to Mass.

I dispute your assertion that there is a vast number of people who used to stay home, and now can go to Mass. Could you substantiate this somehow? In any case, it makes no difference to my point. If they can’t kneel they may stand at the communion rail, as they did in former times (and still do at the TLM). How is this a serious objection?

–Paul

 

[Mysty101]

Unity of posture—
from the USCCB

In addition to serving as a vehicle for the prayer of beings composed of body and spirit, the postures and gestures in which we engage at Mass have another very important function. The Church sees in these common postures and gestures both a symbol of the unity of those who have come together to worship and a means of fostering that unity. We are not free to change these postures to suit our own individual piety, for the Church makes it clear that our unity of posture and gesture is an expression of our participation in the one Body formed by the baptized with Christ, our head. When we stand, kneel, sit, bow and sign ourselves in common action, we given unambiguous witness that we are indeed the Body of Christ, united in heart, mind and spirit.

Email us at liturgy@usccb.org
Committee on the Liturgy | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3000 © USCCB. All rights reserved.

 

[Mysty101]

PS

You can’t be serious?!? Even if this were true–which I doubt–you could just start earlier in the day; sure, people might object, but it’s hardly martyrdom. Or they could just start walking again, or taking public transport (which would be good stewardship as well).

One of the reasons for the change was not to reschedule Masses which ran overlong. And to ask people to walk to Mass? You don’t want to give them another excuse to stay home.

 

[pgoings]

Mysty,

I assume that the quote you posted (which is from the USCCB Committee on the Liturgy, and therefore binds neither in law, nor in conscience) on “Unity of posture” refers to my contention that (as was always done when kneeling was the only licit option) those who cannot kneel should stand at the communion rail? And that this idea is refuted by the bishops’ opinion that “the Church sees in these common postures and gestures both a symbol of the unity of those who have come together to worship and a means of fostering that unity”?

If so, may I ask what is to be done with regard to those who can neither stand nor walk? Shall we all be required to receive Holy Communion sitting in our pews, as they did at my friend’s Presbyterian church? Are those in wheelchairs guilty of disobedience? If not, why are the two cases different?

You also say:

One of the reasons for the change was not to reschedule Masses which ran overlong.

Where may I find this documented?

And also, regarding:

And to ask people to walk to Mass? You don’t want to give them another excuse to stay home.

Are any disciplines of the Latin Church up for debate, insofar as they might give people an excuse not to participate? The celibacy of the priesthood is also* merely* a matter of discipline; would you like to see that dispensed with? (It would enable more Masses to be said, certainly.) Where are your boundaries?

–Paul

 

[Mysty101]

pgoings:

Mysty,

I assume that the quote you posted (which is from the USCCB Committee on the Liturgy, and therefore binds neither in law, nor in conscience) on “Unity of posture” refers to my contention that (as was always done when kneeling was the only licit option) those who cannot kneel should stand at the communion rail?

You assume incorrectly. Please read the entire thread here, and also the poll on posture before you continue.

Also the GIRM section on posture, which has been posted many times.

 

[pgoings]

Mysty,

That was a** non-answer.** I have read both threads (several times!) as well as the GIRM, RS, ID (and a host of other legislation and commentary).

If I assumed incorrectly about what your point was,* what was it?*

Why are parts of my reply underlined? Do you disagree that the committee statement is non-binding in any way? If so, does any committee statement bind in law or conscience? Why? Where is that legislated or defined?

Also, you did not respond to my other points. Why?

–Paul

 

[fix]

Any bishop who claims that no one may kneel to receive communion is disobeying the Vatican. No one is obliged to obey a command that contradicts a higher authority. It is not disobedient to kneel and the Vatican has said so. No bishop has the authority to override the Vatican.

As for more people attending mass it should not be the issue. Faithfulness is the issue. If more people are attending now, yet are in a state of mortal sin from contraception and the like, how is that a benefit?

 

[kmktexas]

Mysty101:

Let’s see what happens when it gets as crowded as some NO Parishes. We have 8 overcrowded Masses every weekend. How many TLM? and how many standing through the whole Mass (because there aren’t enough seats)?

There were actually some time studies done lately that showed that distribution of Communion is faster when done at the rail rather than standing in lines. (given the same number of communicants and the same number of minister distributing) I will find the reference and post it here. So using your issue, all crowded parishes should go back to kneeling at the rail as a remedy for overcrowding?

 

[D.O.M]

Quote:

There were actually some time studies done lately that showed that distribution of Communion is faster when done at the rail rather than standing in lines. (given the same number of communicants and the same number of minister distributing) I will find the reference and post it here. So using your issue, all crowded parishes should go back to kneeling at the rail as a remedy for overcrowding?

I have read this too. I have also read and been told by several priests that it takes less time for them to distribute Holy Communion if all receive on their tongues (if a communicant receives in the hand, they are required to consume the Host in front of the Minister of Holy Communion) so perhaps in order to conserve time in these overcrowded Masses everyone should receive on the tongue as well!

 

[BulldogCath]

Understand one thing, the Bishops here in the US are far more liberal than what comes out at the Vatican. The Vatican, for worse, not better, allows these Bishops here, among who the ones I would trust I could count on one hand, to run the ship as they please, and basicall snub their nose back at the Holy Father and Cardinal Ratzinger.

Some years back there was, under Vatican request, a full investigations of the seminaries here. This is also being planned again. Once again, as they have done in the past, the Vatican is allowing the US Bishops and clergy to decide who is to investigate themselves, sort of like the fox supervising the chicken coup.

Corruption is present, as it has throughout church history. A little history for you:

• Arian heresy started in 318-819 AD with the Priest Arius spreading heresy about Jesus not being the son of God. Catholics forced to worship in the countryside. Not settled till Nicea and then afterwards.
• 928-932AD-The rule of filth where rich Roman families controlled the Papacy
• 956AD-Temporal ruler of Rome, Octavian, took the name John XII and became Pope. He was later murdered in 964 by the husband of the wife he was having an affair with.
• 1033-Count of Tuscalum purchased the Papacy for his 10 year old son, who took the name Benedict IX. This went on until the year 1076 with 3 men claiming to be Pope.
• 1294-Pope Boniface VIII had the Pope dethroned/resigned, and later had him imprisoned and killed. The murdered Pope later became a saint.
• 14th to 16th century-heresies that eventually led to the reformation.
• Council of Trent restored all things.
• 19th-century-The French revolution where we are taught in school how great this is, where clergy are murdered all over, and Modernism and the Masons start to infiltrate the church and eventually lead to Vatican II
• Present day scandals and falling away from the faith

So the GIRM is all well and good, but tale a moment to look at the church and her history, and you must always do what is right and in your consciences and always err on the side of reverence.

Mysty101:

I am still wondering—so far 22% of those who voted, voted to kneel always—Do all of this number attend a Parish where there are no provisions to kneel, and they have been instructed to stand? This is what I really want to know? How many people put their “inclination or arbitrary choice” ahead of the instructions in the GIRM?

If Rome is is so adament about allowing kneeling, they should not have approved the US adaptations.

 

[Nota_Bene]

fix:

Any bishop who claims that no one may kneel to receive communion is disobeying the Vatican. No one is obliged to obey a command that contradicts a higher authority. It is not disobedient to kneel and the Vatican has said so. No bishop has the authority to override the Vatican…

Poppycock.

You are illustrating a prime reason why “traditionalists” are often laughed at…

People whine about liturgical irregularities and abuses (often rightly so), but they then promote other abuses because they know “better” than the Church.

Utter poppycock. That’s cafeteria Catholicism at its absolute worst…

 

[Marie]

The continual need of some people, to constantly play the “I know better than the Church” card, is certainly an epidemic.

While we, the faithful, are called to reverence, we are also called to obedience and respect of the leaders of Holy Mother Church…in Rome and in our Dioceses and parish. That is the bottom line. We have never abandoned nor should we…the root of reverence and faith…obedience, trust and humility.

As a cradle Catholic, I find this constant bashing and trashing and continual contretemps of the laity, an abuse in and of itself. As great if not more so, than all the other problems we have in this modern age.

 

[Brendan]

Nota Bene:

Poppycock.

You are illustrating a prime reason why “traditionalists” are often laughed at…

People whine about liturgical irregularities and abuses (often rightly so), but they then promote other abuses because they know “better” than the Church.

Utter poppycock. That’s cafeteria Catholicism at its absolute worst…

NB,

What exactly is your ‘Poppycock’ refering to? Was it “No Bishop has the authority to override the Vatican?”

Is that your premise? That a Bishop does, in fact, have the authority to override the Vatican?

 

[fix]

Nota Bene:

Poppycock.

You are illustrating a prime reason why “traditionalists” are often laughed at…

People whine about liturgical irregularities and abuses (often rightly so), but they then promote other abuses because they know “better” than the Church.

Utter poppycock. That’s cafeteria Catholicism at its absolute worst…

No, it is not cafeteriaism, rather it is logical and cheerful obedience to ligitimate authority. I imagine you place yourself above the Vatican and make yourself the final authority. BTW, I attend a NO mass each week, stand for communion and accept all the teachings of the Church. What I do not do is claim the Vatican is inferior to a single bishop with an agenda.

If some laugh at those who are orthodox and faithful, all the better for Christ said those who stand with Him will be persecuted.

 

[fix]

Brendan:

NB,

What exactly is your ‘Poppycock’ refering to? Was it “No Bishop has the authority to override the Vatican?”

Is that your premise? That a Bishop does, in fact, have the authority to override the Vatican?

It seems poppycock means right reason and authentic authority.

 

[BulldogCath]

With all due respect, I dont think traditionalists are often laughed at, it they with all due respect who are trying, in their own way, correct or not, to maintain the sacred tradition of the church, and not change it at every whim, against the past teachings of almost every Pope, to satisfy the liberal wing of the Church, and of course the Protestants. We could sit here for the next 10 days and discuss Vatican II, and if you have ever read some of the documents that the traditionalists have put out on why they disagree, and compare them to the counter thought, I would say that trads win 75% of the argument.
Nota Bene:

Poppycock.

You are illustrating a prime reason why “traditionalists” are often laughed at…

People whine about liturgical irregularities and abuses (often rightly so), but they then promote other abuses because they know “better” than the Church.

Utter poppycock. That’s cafeteria Catholicism at its absolute worst…

 

[jlw]

Marie:

HMMM! While I quite like kneeling…I prefer obedience and humility to obstinent bashing and trashing a Bishop’s authority to decide.

Just a thought…perhap’s you need to pray on it more and gripe about it less. I realize it is hard for converts to get the hang of the grace of obedience. It’s hard for all of us…but it is a grace and a serious element of our Catholic faith, we take just as serious as postures.
Pax.
Marie

A worthy response. Can’t have enough humilty!! AND…

Are bishops, given what has been written, supposed to DISALLOW me from kneeling??? They can affirm the “norm, here in the US”, but they aren’t supposed to deny me the sacred Body and Blood of Christ if I fall to my knees, are they??

Keep in mind, I go to a parish where everyone kneels (we have a rail and a kneeler). So my brash comment was sort of silly.

Again, I just think it is wierd that all this hubbub is about maintaining our human comfort *“not too much waiting…” “what about the people with bad knees?..” “what about the flow?..” “in the interest of time…” *instead of the most outward sign of reverence (beyond being flat on our stomaches) for our Lord!!

I am not saying that those who prefer standing aren’t reverant in their hearts (sounds protestant, please forgive me) when they stand before their Lord and Savior. Who the heck am I, a poor sinner, to know other peoples’ hearts and love of Jesus Christ???

I am just arguing that OUTWARD SIGNS of reverence (not prideful hey-look-at-me-I’m-holy balogna) are very important to our Catholic Faith!

Thanks again Marie for the reality check.