Vatican: Receiving Eucharist kneeling will be norm at papal liturgies

  • Thread starter Thread starter Caveman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
First of all, there has been some bad interpretations by both Joysong and Lux because they only referenced the English GIRM which is not completely universal.
You forgot my post #238 where I referenced the latin GIRM? I think all of us can agree “latin” is the universal language for the Church and spells out what is the universal norm. It does say the same as the English GIRM, that the E.C. may adopt standing OR kneeling.
Second, the GIRM in Italian and Spanish leaves it up to the Episcopal Conferences to decide if they are going to adopt standing.
Only if you insert commas to make it mean what you say it does. You have done the same thing with the Latin GIRM to force the meaning you want to hold. I believe there are also many versions for other countries, and I strongly suspect they, too, would say the same thing, permitting the EC of each country to decide whether to “kneel OR stand.” I do know some knowledgable posters in the Asian countries, but that would not convince you either, for you would insert a comma.
Furthermore, Lux made a very erroneous statement when he noted that standing was the posture for the Eucharistic Prayer without checking his sources. He only went by what he saw when he was in a foreign country.
Lux is correct as was demonstrated in the L&S thread here [and I know you read it], which says:
A common early posture for Christian prayer was standing. The Council of Nicea (c.325) prescribed that, on Sundays and during the Easter Season, prayers should always be standing, rather than while kneeling (canon 20), a custom also mentioned by the early Christian author Tertullian (2nd-3rd Centuries). It is still customary for many Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox communities to stand rather than kneel during the Eucharist on Sundays and especially during the Easter Season.
This custom of standing is also followed in the Roman Rite when the Litany of the Saints is sung during the Easter Season. Although bowing and kneeling also are traditional postures during prayer, in earlier centuries kneeling was considered more as a symbol of penance for sin rather than a sign of respect during prayer. Thus, in early Christianity, kneeling was appropriate during Lent or at other times of penance, but not on days of joy. Nevertheless, prior to the Second Vatican Council, kneeling (rather than standing) was usually considered the most appropriate gesture for prayer no matter what the occasion.
The GIRM includes explicit general norms for posture during the revised Mass. Thus, as a general rule, ministers and people stand throughout the liturgy, particularly during the presidential prayers including the Eucharistic Prayer, following the ancient tradition.
When the 1969 Order of Mass became commonly used in the early 1970s, many countries of the world adopted these general norms of the GIRM without any adaptations. Thus, in many European countries, it is common for people to stand through most of the Eucharistic Prayer and only kneel for the institution narrative (if kneelers are available in the church), standing immediately afterwards to sing the memorial acclamation.
The U.S. Bishops, however, adapted the general norm to permit people to remain kneeling from the Sanctus to the concluding Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, since the posture of kneeling was such an ingrained practice in the U.S. at that time.
B'gal:
Furthermore, I sense a strong air of dissent regarding the issue of kneeling, even after the Vatican has defended it on several occasions.
That is your opinion, BG, but again, it is a wrong one. Not a single person has opposed kneeling, which is permitted in the US adaptation. It appears to me that the only reason for this argument extending itself into almost 300 posts, is to defend your right to change the interpretation of the GIRM, uncontested. THIS is the strong air of dissent, and not as you would have others believe is ‘kneeling.’ Our position has been very clearly defined and proved:
  • The faithful in the US, under the adaptation, may kneel, although the underlying intent is to avoid arbitrary private inclination – language specifically chosen by the GIRM.
  • The GIRM #160, whether in Latin, Spanish, Italian, or English, says specifically that the E.C. may decide whether to kneel OR stand. No commas.
  • Msgr. Marini’s letter is speaking only with regard to papal celebrations, and is not addressing anything else. A letter is not an official document, no matter what the content.
 
Yes, that is interesting. Sorry I can’t divulge any info about someone else.

Congratulations on your studies. Are you on your way to priestly ordination, or the permanent deaconate?

Also are these the norms for the TLM or the NO? 1970 or 2000? This is also the reason for much confusion.

Lux
Permanent Diaconate ( I’ve got a wife and 5 kids, so I’m hardly Sacredotal material 😉 )

These are all norms for the 2000 Missal.

The TLM has it’s own, seperate set of Norms and rubrics.
 
Hey—congrats—Is that a recent picture?

You look so young—must have been quintuplets 😃
 
ps re the universal norm, I coundn’t find the Latin GIRM on the Vatican website, but I did find RS with footnotes -
[90.] «Fideles communicant genuflexi vel stantes, prout Conferentia Episcoporum statuerit»,actis a Sede Apostolica recognitis. «Cum autem stantes communicant, commendatur ut debitam reverentiam, ab iisdem normis statuendam, ante susceptionem Sacramenti faciant».[176]
[176] Cf. Missale Romanum, Institutio Generalis, n. 160.
Lux
 
In order to clearly substantiate the Spanish version of the GIRM, I present the wording with its english translation:
El permanecer de pie para recibir la Sagrada comunión, una costumbre ancestral practicada en la Iglesia Oriental y Occidental, fue restaurada en las reformas litúrgicas del Vaticano II. Así como permanecemos de pie en reverencia y gozo para recibir la Palabra de Dios en el Evangelio, de igual manera permanecemos de pie en reverencia y gozo para recibir el Cuerpo y la Sangre de Cristo en la Sagrada Comunión.
El GIRM revisado permite que los obispos de cada país escojan la postura apropiada para recibir la comunión.
Translation:
Remaining standing to receive Holy Communion, an ancient custom practised in the Oriental and Western Church was restored in the liturgical reforms of the Vatican II. As well as we remain standing in reverence and pleasure to receive God’s Word in the Gospel, of equal way we remain standing in reverence and pleasure to receive the Body and Christ’s Blood in Holy Communion.
The revised GIRM allows that the bishops of EVERY country should choose the position adapted to receive communion.
I understand this sentence goes well beyond US, Spanish, or Italian, and is specifically the language in the Latin GIRM so that all countries may be included in the E.C.'s option to choose. Since other countries use the norm of standing throughout the Eucharistic Prayer, except for the consecration, and indeed until the end of Mass, then one can assume standing is the universal norm in these countries, and not kneeling, as is the "ancient custom restored in the reforms of V-II.
 
Joysong,

It doesn’t matter how WE interprete the GIRM, it matters how the CDWDS interprets it. The CDWDS alone knows under what conditions it approved GIRM 160 (both Universal and with the US adaptions)

L&T meantioned the confusion. That is precisecly why the bishops request clarification from the Vatican. And the Vatican has been very clear.

The faithful may kneel if they so choose. If they kneel, they are not doing so illictly ( they are doing nothing against either Pariticular Law or the Universal Law), nor are they being disobedient.

That is as clear as it can get from the source higher than any bishop’s conference.
 
The faithful may kneel if they so choose. If they kneel, they are not doing so illictly ( they are doing nothing against either Pariticular Law or the Universal Law), nor are they being disobedient.
We’re starting to look like Pete and Re-Pete here. 😛

Did you read my agreement about six posts ago?
40.png
Joysong:
The faithful in the US, under the adaptation, may kneel, although the underlying intent is to avoid arbitrary private inclination – language specifically chosen by the GIRM.
How do you see that as DISagreement, or needing to re-define it for me … yet again?
 
As Lux mentioned several pages ago, this topic has morphed into a private debate, rather than the topic, which is “kneeling at the papal liturgies”.

May I ask that we return to topic?

I believe several pages of commentary have been thoroughly submitted, well beyond the norm for discussion. This thread is turning into a tug of war that will never end in a solution.

Whether or not total kneeling is in the process of becoming the norm in some future directive from Rome is unknown, and needlessly being speculated upon, and is totally off-topic, dividing us as the Body of Christ.
 
As Lux mentioned several pages ago, this topic has morphed into a private debate, rather than the topic, which is “kneeling at the papal liturgies”.

May I ask that we return to topic?

I believe several pages of commentary have been thoroughly submitted, well beyond the norm for discussion. This thread is turning into a tug of war that will never end in a solution.

Whether or not total kneeling is in the process of becoming the norm in some future directive from Rome is unknown, and needlessly being speculated upon, and is totally off-topic, dividing us as the Body of Christ.
I agree totally, Joysong. :clapping: :amen:
Lynn-D
 
As Lux mentioned several pages ago, this topic has morphed into a private debate, rather than the topic, which is “kneeling at the papal liturgies”.

May I ask that we return to topic?

I believe several pages of commentary have been thoroughly submitted, well beyond the norm for discussion. This thread is turning into a tug of war that will never end in a solution.

Whether or not total kneeling is in the process of becoming the norm in some future directive from Rome is unknown, and needlessly being speculated upon, and is totally off-topic, dividing us as the Body of Christ.
I also agree with the above assessment of this thread. It is now closed. Thanks to all who participated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top