Vatican: Receiving Eucharist kneeling will be norm at papal liturgies

[sioe]

Personal thought - Thank God we’re getting away from the Protestant inspired “Communion in the hand”. After all, if we REALLY DO believe that The Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, then shouldn’t we approch Him in awe and reverence on our knees, vice standing with a handshake?

From The Catholic News Service;

Vatican: Receiving Eucharist kneeling will be norm at papal liturgies

VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Receiving the Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling before the pope will become the norm at papal liturgies, said the Vatican’s liturgist.

While current norms allow the faithful to receive the Eucharist in the hand while standing, Pope Benedict XVI has indicated a preference for the more traditional practice, said Msgr. Guido Marini, master of papal liturgical ceremonies.

Kneeling and receiving Communion on the tongue highlights “the truth of the real presence (of Christ) in the Eucharist, helps the devotion of the faithful and introduces the sense of mystery more easily,” he said in a June 26 interview with the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano.

 

[saylo]

This paragraph above strongly suggestive of “outward appearances” and forgetting the “inward act” of humility before the Savior. It also satarizes the most profound moments iin our Faith…the reception of Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Holy Eucharist. The satire outlined above “…throwing themselves down in front of the pope…” is a twisted notion of what is taking place at Holy Communion. We all know you really didn’t mean to satarized it in that manner.

It is NOT a battle of wills, as you say, it is an exercise in appreciation for “The Bread of Life.”

“…anyone who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood SHALL NEVER DIE…”

Words to ponder!

They are not to be denied, but they are to be instructed in the reasons for the norm.

Again, what do we do, if we are told to purify? I don’t know if I would refuse my Pastor. I will never be in that position because I resigned as an EMHC because I was told to allow self intinction. In hindsight, I think I would just have reminded the person that they are not allowed to do this, and offered a sip, without pressing the issue with my Pastor.

And we are told how to handle these problems. It is not by engaging in a battle of wills, or disrespecting the Bishop.

It seems like you are taking this on a kind of “personal level” with a bishop. It is NOT a “battle of wills” it is proper and allowed to have one receive while kneeling. All that is needed is an altar rail in the center aisle where the priest can distribute Holy Communion to all those who wish to kneel and for those who want to stand and receive on the tongue do so on the left and right aisles by Eucharistic Ministers.

The Mass is NOT a show…it is Heaven touching down here on Earth in our very presence. It is Christ Himself accompanied with legions of angels to feed our souls so that we may have eternal life and bliss. Kneeling is a way of showing appreciation and saying, “Thank You, Lord Jesus!”

—Saylo

 

[Walking_Home]

I am asking people to be objective and reasonable. If you think it is reasonable and “best” to engage in a battle of wills with a priest at communion time, or to disrespect a bishop, so be it.

This is a silly comparison. I had this discussion with a very conservative priest, and he said that unless it was a matter against Faith (doctrine, not personal piety) or morals, we are to obey those in lawful authority. Again, you do as you choose.

Lux

---

You left out the fundamental obedience by bishops, priests, and laity to the Church’s authority in liturgical matters.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

…and so is subjecting your will.

If you believe the act of inturrupting the Communion is less important than your right, that is your choice, but do not get upset if others disagree.

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

…and so is subjecting your will.

If you believe the act of inturrupting the Communion is less important than your right, that is your choice, but do not get upset if others disagree.

Lux

---

Seems the ones thinking ill of one who kneels is doing the “interrupting”.

 

[Joysong]

9 After this I saw a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and tribes, and peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne, and in sight of the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands: 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying: Salvation to our God, who sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb.

11 And all the angels stood round about the throne, and the ancients, and the four living creatures; and they fell down before the throne upon their faces, and adored God, 12 Saying: Amen. Benediction, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, honour, and power, and strength to our God for ever and ever. Amen.

The angels and ancients fell prostrate before the throne, whereas the multitude from all nations, tribes, people were standing. I perceive uniformity here, no matter which group is mentioned.

Our parish processes only down the center aisle for communion - standing. The imagery is to me very beautiful – that I, as a bride of Christ about to receive my Bridegroom, process down the aisle to be joined with Him. In a bridal procession, I have never seen a bridesmaid take it upon herself (though it may be her right to do so) to step out of pace with the others and kneel or genuflect, nor have I seen a bride kneel before being joined with her intended at the altar.

While it is certainly the right of others to kneel in accord with their piety, it is judgmental to hold others in disdain if they find the processional posture of standing equally as devout, if not * more so,* according to their interior disposition. I believe personally that it is disruptive to express one’s external piety in opposition to the norm, and demonstrate a great variety of expressions in a solemn procession. I have seen people make a sign of the cross, genuflect, kneel, etc., but only on EWTN. Generally, most people are respectful of the norm set in their diocese and parish.

So, why the fuss?

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

---

You left out the fundamental obedience by bishops, priests, and laity to the Church’s authority in liturgical matters.

I most certainly did not. Did you read my post?

Lux

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

While it is certainly the right of others to kneel in accord with their piety, it is judgmental to hold others in disdain if they find the processional posture of standing equally as devout, if not * more so,* according to their interior disposition. I believe personally that it is disruptive to express one’s external piety in opposition to the norm, and demonstrate a great variety of expressions in a solemn procession. Generally, most people are respectful of the norm set in their diocese and parish.

So, why the fuss?

Exactly. This is the spirit of community worship, and what we are instructed to do.

Lux

 

[MHalsey]

One thing that I find discontigious about the “holier than thou” claim is that it’s rather hypocritical. The Church has allowed variation in posture at this point (and certain others). To claim that a person kneeling is exhibiting a “holier than thou” attitude, or is not conforming to demands for postural unity above what the Church Herself calls for, is illogical at best. It is a self defeating claim. To call for more than the Church does on posture, and then accuse those who do not follow to be 'holier than thou" is hypocratic at best.

Please note that I am NOT saying that you advocate this position, rather I am pointing out the logical flaws in the position itself.

You’re correct. I am not advocating for any position. But I was only referring to the perception one might have. That’s not the same as accusing someone of being “holier than thou”. I know of a few people in our parish who exhibit this kind of attitude but would never accuse them of it.

I don’t believe I have ever advocated that the rest of congregation follow. My main point is that the faithful in the US have a choice that they can make, to follow either of the postures approved for the Ordinary Form, as their personal spirituality calls for.

Except of course if the universal norm is practiced. Then I think we are required to kneel.

If it appears ‘out of place’ to some, that is irrelevant. That’s one of the cool things about being Catholic, we are called to be counter-cultural at times, we are to stand up ( or kneel ) for our beliefs. Some, like L&T, place an emphasis on doing whatever everyone else is doing. That’s fine. If that is what brings L&T closer to God, and it is within the approved Norms, I have no objection what so ever.

I hope the same is extended to me.

I think we are in agreement here. I have no objections, even if it does seem out of place. The interesting thing about all this is that I can’t think of a Mass I’ve been to, where the particular norm is practiced, that I’ve seen someone receive communion on their knees. So until I actually experience this in our church, it’s all speculation on my part.

Actually, now that I think about it, I think I’d like for someone to do it just to see how the congregation reacts. In many ways we are like sheep who follow along just because someone else does it. Perhaps it would start a new trend. That would be something.

Is it necessary for your church to have a railing to do this? Or can one just kneel when he/she gets to the front of the line?

 

[MHalsey]

Wouldn’t those standing being judgmental?

They probably would be. My point was how one *might *react.

Does standing give a communicant special insights to read a soul?

I never said it did. Again, just how one *might *react.

Whatever the case, a communicant has the privilege of kneeling; it has never been taken away from hi/her.FONT]

I never said they didn’t.

 

[Walking_Home]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post
You left out the fundamental obedience by bishops, priests, and laity to the Church’s authority in liturgical matters.

I most certainly did not. Did you read my post?

Lux

Lux

Quote=Lux et Tenebrae
I am asking people to be objective and reasonable. If you think it is reasonable and “best” to engage in a battle of wills with a priest at communion time, or to disrespect a bishop, so be it.

This is a silly comparison. I had this discussion with a very conservative priest, and he said that unless it was a matter against Faith (doctrine, not personal piety) or morals, we are to obey those in lawful authority. Again, you do as you choose.

Lux

---

Yes I did. By promoting obedience to one who disobeys the Church — you promote disobedience to the Church.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Again, you give your personal slant.

As I said, we are told how to handle these situations, and it is to question an instruction outside of Mass. (and always in charity)

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

Again, you give your personal slant.

As I said, we are told how to handle these situations, and it is to question an instruction outside of Mass. (and always in charity)

Lux

---

No personal slant ---- you are promoting an agenda --which is in conflict with the mind of the Church.

I don’t believe anyone here has said for a person to tell a priest off right there in the middle of Mass —if they are refused communion or made to feel disobedient for kneeling to receive communion. Communicate with the priest, then the bishop --then with Rome. And we do have authoritative statement from Rome on the matter of kneeling for communion.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

This is what I have been saying all along.

But it is OK for me to be accused of denying the authority of the pope, and for the USCCB to be disrespected.

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

This is what I have been saying all along.

But it is OK for me to be accused of denying the authority of the pope, and for the USCCB to be disrespected.

Lux

---

Really – is that what you’ve been saying --well it must have been lost in all your post where you imply people who kneel are not complying with the norms. And in the way you tried to side step the universal norms. And in the way you used the USCCB to promote your agenda against kneeling. etc.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

I am not the one who disrespected the USCCB, or falsely accused anyone of anything. I mentioned the reasons for worshipping in community. Your spirit shows in your angry, accusatory and agressive posts.

I will pray for you to find peace as well as a parish which worships as you prefer.

Lux

 

[Brendan]

I am asking people to be objective and reasonable. If you think it is reasonable and “best” to engage in a battle of wills with a priest at communion time, or to disrespect a bishop, so be it.

There could be no ‘battle of wills’ or ‘disrepect’ because no one is doing anything that is forbidden, or even frowned up by the Church. If a particular pastor ( or even bishop) wants to be holier that the Church Herself, that is their problem, not mine. They can engage in all the battles they want. I’ll just do what the Church tells me I can do.

This is a silly comparison. I had this discussion with a very conservative priest, and he said that unless it was a matter against Faith (doctrine, not personal piety) or morals, we are to obey those in lawful authority. Again, you do as you choose.

Lux

Correct, the Lawful authority, ( the CDWDS as the Compentent Legislative Authority under Canon 16) states that I may personally choose which posture. Anyone who says otherwise is claiming more authority than they have under the law.

So, by your own admission, there is no obedience required.

Here is Canon 16

Can. 16 §1. The legislator authentically interprets laws as does the one to whom the same legislator has entrusted the power of authentically interpreting.

§2. An authentic interpretation put forth in the form of law has the same force as the law itself and must be promulgated. If it only declares the words of the law which are certain in themselves, it is retroactive; if it restricts or extends the law, or if it explains a doubtful law, it is not retroactive.

Note specifically part 2. The CDWDS is the Legislator of the General Instruction.

Cardinal Arinze, , responded with an Authentic Interpretation of the General Instruction, stating that the Particular Norm of standing was not approved in such a way as to override the Universal Norm of Kneeling, and that those that choose to kneel are not being disobedient in doing so.

 

[Walking_Home]

I am not the one who disrespected the USCCB, or falsely accused anyone of anything. I mentioned the reasons for worshipping in community. Your spirit shows in your angry, accusatory and agressive posts.

I will pray for you to find peace as well as a parish which worships as you prefer.

Lux

---

So- I see you are still pushing the “worshipping in community”. Implying the persons who kneel are “disrupting the community”. So in essence you are right back to where you were before.

By the way --you were the one who made the USCCB look bad by bringing them in to backup your anti-kneeling agenda.

 

[benedictgal]

I am not the one who disrespected the USCCB, or falsely accused anyone of anything. I mentioned the reasons for worshipping in community. Your spirit shows in your angry, accusatory and agressive posts.

I will pray for you to find peace as well as a parish which worships as you prefer.

Lux

Lux, you talk about community and about everyone being in uniformity. How about during the Papal Mass, when, perhaps 50-60 people are kneeling and the tens of thousands at either St. Peter’s Basilica or Square are standing? Where is your unity there?

Furthermore, no one is disrespecting the USCCB. We are respectfully stating some disagreements with certain actions that the conference has taken.

You seem to be harping on an issue that just isn’t germaine to the topic at hand. Furthermore, I would respectfully challenge you to read what the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said about the liturgy in his book, The Spirit of the Liturgy. What he wrote several years ago as a cardinal is now coming to fruition during his papacy. This includes the issue of kneeling, which, again, is the universal norm for receiving Holy Communion. Standing has the status of an indult whose usage is granted only by way of a recognitio from the Holy See. Like all adaptations, these probablycan also be rescinded by the Holy See, as evidenced by the Holy Father’s actions concerning the purification of vessels by the laity.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Two last points, and I will gracefully bow out.

Quote:
This is a silly comparison. I had this discussion with a very conservative priest, and he said that unless it was a matter against Faith (doctrine, not personal piety) or morals, we are to obey those in lawful authority. Again, you do as you choose.

Lux

B:

Correct, the Lawful authority, ( the CDWDS as the Compentent Legislative Authority under Canon 16) states that I may personally choose which posture. Anyone who says otherwise is claiming more authority than they have under the law.

So, by your own admission, there is no obedience required.

This is not what I was told. If a person in authority tells you to do something which is not against Faith or morals, you are to obey. The error is on him.The error of publically defying or disrespecting a priest or bishop is far greater then his error of telling someone to stand for Holy Communion.

And my second point was regarding the slam against the USCCB, which I am glad to see was removed.

By the way --you were the one who made the USCCB look bad by bringing them in to backup your anti-kneeling agenda.

What a pathetic attempt to justify disrespect. Again you have twisted my words.

Peace.

Lux