Sorry—I did think I was done, but I see my words are still misunderstood (or twisted)
For the 1000 time—I am not “anti-kneeling” in general. I do believe it is better not to kneel if there are no provisions, and the flow of a solemn Communion procession is interrupted. I f someone wishes to kneel, and this is not the custom, and there are no provisions, it is time to speak to the Pastor, as we are instructed to do, if we feel something needs to be done.
Also, some seem to speak of kneeling and “on the tongue” in the same respect. On the tongue is a legitimate option in the NO. Kneeling was not approved as an option in the norms, since it is contrary to the Communion procession. I am not speaking of universal norms, or rights, but the norms of the NO Mass. How would anyone feel if someone went to a TLM, and demanded to stand for Communion, claiming this is the normative posture in the US?
This is a matter of being reasonable, and considering the solemnity of the Communion procession.
Lux
No one is twisting your words. Please read what you have posted.
Your final arguments do not make any sense at all. Have you not seen either of the last two Papal Masses on TV? The Gentlemen of His Holiness brought the prei-dieu (kneeler) for the faithful receiving Holy Communion from Pope Benedict to use. The distribution of Holy Communion took no longer than had the communicants been standing.
As late as 1976, when I received First Holy Communion, we were still using the Communion Rail. As late as 1982, the practice was still going on until a new pastor came. Holy Communion didn’t take any longer for us than it did for those who stood.
Regarding the solemnity of the Communion Procession, kneeling is actually the most solemn of all postures. Even though you claim that you are not against kneeling, your words remind me of something that Pope Benedict wrote:
There are groups, of no small influence, who are trying to talk us out of kneeling. “It doesn’t suit our culture”, they say (which culture?) “It’s not right for a grown man to do this – he should face God on his feet”. Or again: “It’s not appropriate for redeemed man – he has been set free by Christ and doesn’t need to kneel any more”.
…Kneeling does not come from any culture – it comes from the Bible and its knowledge of God. The central importance of kneeling in the Bible can be seen in a very concrete way. The word proskynein alone occurs fifty-nine times in the New Testament, twenty-four of which are in the Apocalypse, the book of the heavenly Liturgy, which is presented to the Church as the standard for her own Liturgy.
While you may not be saying that it doesn’t belong outright, the tenor of your posts seems to indicate otherwise.
Furthermore, we have all noted that kneeling to receive Holy Communion is the
universal norm. Standing is an option, but, as Cardinal Arinze noted, it does not have the force of universal law. The communicant has every right to receive Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue.
Finally, one is not supposed to mix the OF and the EF. Pope Benedict made it very clear. The GIRM for the OF and the GIRM for the EF are radically different. The only allowance made in the EF is for the option to use the readings from the OF; but, that’s it. There is no option, under the EF, for receiving Holy Communion standing. Your assumption is incorrect.
:yup:
.
. One line of communicants stands behind those kneeling at the rail and take the place of those that leave. The Priest then returns to the person at the left of the rail and just walks to the right of the rail and so forth. Actually it is sometimes quicker since the person receiving can actually finish his or her prayer prior to making room for the next person.