Why is it that I seem to be the only one doing this...?

[Sacramentalist]

legeorge:

I’m pretty sure someone will pound me with a barrage of liturgical norms and GIRM and all that fancy book-learnin’ stuff but this was an experience I had:
A couple of years ago, I was at a large celebration of the Mass for Divine Mercy Sunday at a local Shrine. For some reason, I was particularly moved during the Mass and was uncontrollably weeping all the way through the Eucharistic Prayer (I tried so hard not to be noticed!). On my way up to Communion, while the person directly in front of me was receiving Communion, I felt a tremendous force on my shoulders and had to go down on one knee. I got a strong feeling that I should always do this before receiving the Eucharist. Since then, I have always bowed my head and dropped to one knee before standing to receive. I almost always receive on the tongue. If, however, I happen to get an EMHC gravitate to my line, I will receive in the hand (only if I am not holding a child, which is a great way to avoid receiving in the hand BTW!). However, I only have to do this about once or twice a year. I try to avoid that situation because the last time it happened, the EMHC plopped the host into my hand like a necco wafer and I felt so offended by his nonchalance, that I practically cried for the rest of Mass. Usually I don’t even have to think about it, as 75% of the time we go to Mass at the Shrine, which is Maronite, and so everyone receives on the tongue since the Maronite Rite practices intinction, and the Priest is the only one to distribute Communion. Praise Be To God! (Sorry if I am offending anyone, but I’m not a really big fan of EMHC as you can probably tell.)
Take this as you will. It is only the experience of one lowly person trying to determine God’s will. This is what works for me and I hope it is pleasing to the Lord.

I believe it is offensive and abusive to receive kneeling or to genuflect at a Maronite Sunday Liturgy.

In the Eastern Churches, from what I understand, the sign of reverence/respect is standing.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Any Maronites are free to correct me.

 

[Anima_Christi]

Della:

I bow deeply and receive on the tongue if receiving from a priest or deacon as directed by our bishops (but receive in the hand from an EMHC because I will not give them the same respect due to an ordained minister of the sacraments).

I wish altar rails would be put back into place so that everyone would once again kneel to receive as was done in the past. I really never saw any good reason to have people come up like a herd of cattle–it’s confusing, irreverent, and just plain ridiculous, if you ask me.

Are you supposed to receive in the hand if receiving from an EMHC? I always receive on the tongue anyway. After all, isn’t it Jesus in the Eucharist you are showing respect to by receiving on the tongue, and not the priest or deacon?

 

[legeorge]

Sacramentalist:

I believe it is offensive and abusive to receive kneeling or to genuflect at a Maronite Sunday Liturgy.

In the Eastern Churches, from what I understand, the sign of reverence/respect is standing.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Any Maronites are free to correct me.

Well, we have had 2 very wonderful monsignors at the shrine since I have been going there. Many, many people pause to genuflect before approaching the priest. All receive standing. Neither one of these monsignors has ever said not to. And they are quite outspoken, so if so many people were doing something out of order, we would have heard about it.

 

[Mysty101]

legeorge:

Well, we have had 2 very wonderful monsignors at the shrine since I have been going there. Many, many people pause to genuflect before approaching the priest. All receive standing. Neither one of these monsignors has ever said not to. And they are quite outspoken, so if so many people were doing something out of order, we would have heard about it.

Many priests will not correct at Communion time. (I have heard one say that he is not the “Communion Police”) Even with the standing norm, I believe the counsel is for later.

If you really want to know, ask the Priests about it. Most really do not like it, since it does usually interrupt the flow, but will not say anything.

Obviously, if many do this, it will increase the time for Communion. If this is not a problem (tight schedule), then the Priest may not mind. Some priests do not like genuflecting because it is not following the norm, which (in the US) is to bow. It is not good to get in the habit of disregarding norms.

 

[Mysty101]

PS The bow is really a beautiful sign of reverence. And for those who like the folded hands posture, it is very natural to bow with hands folded.

Try it. Leave a good space in front of you, and make a profound bow while the person in front of you is receiving. It is far more difficult to genuflect with hands folded.

(Maybe the USCCB does have the common Spiritual good at heart)

 

[Fergal]

Genuflexion

To genuflect [Lat. *genu flectere, *geniculare* (post-classic), to bend the knee; Gr. *gonu klinein* or *kamptein*  expresses:

• an attitude
• a gesture: involving, like prostration, a profession of dependence or helplessness, and therefore very naturally adopted for praying and for worship in general.
  
  “The knee is made flexible by which the offence of the Lord is mitigated, wrath appeased, grace called forth” (St. Ambrose, Hexaem., VI, ix). “By such posture of the body we show forth our humbleness of heart” (Alcuin, De Parasceve). “The bending of the knee is an expression of penitence and sorrow for sins committed” (Rabanus Maurus, De Instit. Cler., II, xli)

---

My friends,
If taking up this posture before reception draws attention to me then so be it. I have no problem with people looking at a person like I, who am so full of sin, so conscious of my nothingness and so in awe of the presence of God before me.

I find it hard to see what is so distracting about one professing his own nothingness. Is it the abasement they find disturbing?

Illi enim qui promittebant timores et perturbationes expellere se ab anima languente, hi cum derisu pleni timore languebant.

For they who promised to drive away fears and troubles from a sick soul, were sick themselves of a fear worthy to be laughed at. Wisdom 17:8

 

[netmilsmom]

otm:

There seems to be some confusion that Rome has abrogated the norm of receiving Communion and that kneeling is perfectly acceptable.

Those who take this position state the response by Rome that Communion cannot be refused to someone who kneels. they therefore assume that rome has now given its blessing to kneeling, language in the GIRM to the contrary.

Refusing someone Communion is a canoncialpenalty, and may only be imposed under certain conditions. When the GIRM came out with receiving standing as the norm, a few priests took it upon themselves to inflict a canonical penalty, and for that they were wrong and properly censured.

However, the language of the GIRM was not removed, changed, abrogated, doen away with, or anything else.

The norm was and is standing; and the GIRM specifically says that those who don’t are to be counseled. That in and of itself is a clear indication that the norm is just a nice idea, or a suggestion, or a wish for conformity. Those who kneel are in viloation of the norm, and while they feel that they can give themselves permission to do otherwise, they are doing the same exact thing that someone who stands during the Eucharistic prayer are doing; they are deciding for themselves what is proper and what is not.

Unlsee and until the GIRM is changed to remove the language (at the bare minimum) that one who kneels for Communion is to be counseled, the law is that one is to receive standing. those who insist to the contrary are just chhosing to ignore the plain language of the GIRM. And we could include the admonition about motes and splinters to those who choose to kneel.

According to EWTN, the Boss of my Bishop has the final word on this…
While the desirability of everyone in the congregation making the common gestures and postures throughout the Mass is clear (a sign of unity), recent interpretations of these norms by the Holy See provides some insight into the mind of the Church. It should be noted that the Holy See alone can authentically interpret legislation it has initiated or approved. The following was issued in response to a dubium of Cardinal George of Chicago. The reference is to the general posture norm, GIRM 43, and whether communicants can kneel down for their thanksgiving after Communion when everyone else is standing, however, it is clear that the mind (mens) of the Holy See on the role of posture is expressed. The general principle enunciated in the response would therefore also apply to GIRM 160, and the issues of kneeling to receive and genuflecting before receiving.

Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

5 June 2003

Prot. n. 855/03/L

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Responsum: Negative, et ad mentem. The mens is that that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Francis Cardinal Arinze
Prefect

 

[JKirkLVNV]

dumspirospero:

Sorry I don’t fit your stereotype…nice try, would you like to try again?

But, Dum, you go to an Indult Mass. I think Otm is describing what occurs at Novus Ordo Mass.

I rec. on the tongue, after a bow, as that’s what we were asked to do. I do not think myself more holy nor do I think it more proper to rec. on the tongue, either.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

5 June 2003

Prot. n. 855/03/L

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Responsum: Negative, et ad mentem. The mens is that that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Francis Cardinal Arinze
Prefect

This speaks of kneeling AFTER returning to one’s seat after Communion, not kneeling while receiving (Communion in procession). It shouldn’t be read as anything else, because it’s not about anything else. We’re directed to bow and rec. standing. If we kneel, we cannot be denied Holy Communion, but we’re to be “counseled” as to the proper behavior. This appears to me to be simple obedience. We should do as we’re asked and follow the norm, unless we attend an Indult Mass.

 

[netmilsmom]

JKirkLVNV:

This speaks of kneeling AFTER returning to one’s seat after Communion, not kneeling while receiving (Communion in procession). It shouldn’t be read as anything else, because it’s not about anything else. We’re directed to bow and rec. standing. If we kneel, we cannot be denied Holy Communion, but we’re to be “counseled” as to the proper behavior. This appears to me to be simple obedience. We should do as we’re asked and follow the norm, unless we attend an Indult Mass.

The part of the quote that I highlighted was what I was trying to convey. I kneel for communion and have never been counceled. Until my Priest or my Bishop tells me otherwise, I am allowed.

To be honest with you, I am not comfortable receiving standing and in the hand. I would rather go for a Spiritual Communion in such circumstances or wait for a later Holy Mass at my own church, if I am attending an event in a different one in the morning.
This way, the norm for that church is upheld, but I am not putting myself (or my children) into an uncomfortable situation.

My seven year old literally gags when receiving bread only.

 

[campion]

After reading the GIRM, I began to bow from the waiste up while the person in front of me was receiving. Then, on the Feast of Corpus Chirsti, our priest announced the new directives of receiving the Host and Cup. He said that Genuflecting is out of the question (stating that by doing so, who are we revering- the priest or the Host?). He said that bowing from the waiste up is only reserved for clergy.

He then said that it is the Bishops’ wishes that we bow (by doing a profound nod (head only) while reaffirming with an ‘Amen.’

I now interpret this type of bow during the “…by the power of the holy Spirit…” in the creed.

Makes sense to me- especially the waiste bow being reserved for clergy only.

Thoughts?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

My seven year old literally gags when receiving bread only.

I’m sorry, netmil(name removed by moderator), what do you mean?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

campion:

Makes sense to me- especially the waiste bow being reserved for clergy only.

Thoughts?

Where in goodness’ name did he get that? I’ve never heard of this. At the monastary where I was rec. into the Church, all the monks, lay and ordained, make a profound bow from the waist.

 

[netmilsmom]

JKirkLVNV:

I’m sorry, netmil(name removed by moderator), what do you mean?

The norm in our parish is intinction. When she has received the Body only, she gagged mulitple times. I have to give it to her, she did not throw up and was a little trooper about it, but begged me never to have her do this again. She knew it was Jesus and was in tears that she had problems swallowing.
I told her that if she needed to receive this way again, I would see if I could arrange to have her receive a piece of matter instead of the whole thing.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

The norm in our parish is intinction. When she has received the Body only, she gagged mulitple times. I have to give it to her, she did not throw up and was a little trooper about it, but begged me never to have her do this again. She knew it was Jesus and was in tears that she had problems swallowing.
I told her that if she needed to receive this way again, I would see if I could arrange to have her receive a piece of matter instead of the whole thing.

Ah, see, speaking of personal preference, I’m on the same page! The monastery where I was rec. into the Church practices this as well. You rec. both Forms of the Sacred Species, neat and simple. I also sympathize with your little one. I sing in the choir and it seems like they make the hosts drier and drier as the years pass.

 

[netmilsmom]

JKirkLVNV:

Ah, see, speaking of personal preference, I’m on the same page! The monastery where I was rec. into the Church practices this as well. You rec. both Forms of the Sacred Species, neat and simple. I also sympathize with your little one. I sing in the choir and it seems like they make the hosts drier and drier as the years pass.

Oooooo!
That must be tough when singing!
I’m going to tell her your story. I think it will make her feel better. She is still upset that she seemed to be the only one with trouble.

 

[otm]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

According to EWTN, the Boss of my Bishop has the final word on this…
While the desirability of everyone in the congregation making the common gestures and postures throughout the Mass is clear (a sign of unity), recent interpretations of these norms by the Holy See provides some insight into the mind of the Church. It should be noted that the Holy See alone can authentically interpret legislation it has initiated or approved. The following was issued in response to a dubium of Cardinal George of Chicago. The reference is to the general posture norm, GIRM 43, and whether communicants can kneel down for their thanksgiving after Communion when everyone else is standing, however, it is clear that the mind (mens) of the Holy See on the role of posture is expressed. The general principle enunciated in the response would therefore also apply to GIRM 160, and the issues of kneeling to receive and genuflecting before receiving.

Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

5 June 2003

Prot. n. 855/03/L

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Responsum: Negative, et ad mentem. The mens is that that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Francis Cardinal Arinze
Prefect

You are confusing two issues. There appeared to be a direction that all were to stand after receiving Communion until the last one had received; the instructions were less than explicit. The dubium (of which I was familiar), was sent because the instructions were unclear.

However, your attempt to apply them the the posture while receiving does not follow, as the instructions are not only explicit, but also followed by the language to which I referred; that one not standing was to be counseled.

Why is it that everyone wants to ignore the plain language? It could not be more clear that not only was a norm expressed clearly, but furthermore, those who do not follow the norm are to be counseled.

And it constantly amuses me that the liberals appeal to their own sensibilities as to what they wish for liturgical postures and are condemned, while the conservatives appeal to their own sensibilites as to what they wish for liturgical postures, and hold themselves out as having more authority, more right, more holiness and piety. Why the carping about “They don’t follow the rubrics” and the crowing about how they flaunt the personalization of their changes?

Fergal:

If taking up this posture before reception draws attention to me then so be it.

 

[Mysty101]

Yes, isn’t that incongruous?

not regulate posture rigidly

follow this instruction is regards to a specific instruction, but disregard it when there was no posture specified.

Cafeteria Catholicism does take many forms.

 

[netmilsmom]

CatholicCid:

It’s called the “norms” for a reason… The Bishop is not instructing, he is requesting. It is seen as a unity between all the United States Churches… Though we should probably be addressing some bigger issues if we truly want unity.
I know some who wish to be as obedient to the Bishop as possible, but from what they have been taught since children, genuflection is the one of the deepest respects they can give. Try as they like, they can’t hold back when they recieve Communion and genuflect, wanting to give Christ that deep respect.

What you are saying here is somewhat correct. If you look at the USCCB documents, it stated that standing IS the norm and therefore should be followed. However, check with your Bishop’s office. Your Bishop may have taken the road that kneeling is alright and that is all the “counseling” you need.
Your Bishop is who you are under. They have different opinions on how the GIRM is to be enforced.

If you feel that kneeling or genuflecting in your deepest sign of respect and you attend a Holy Mass where they are not doing this, perhaps going to a parish where they are is your best bet. We kneel for communion and receive on the tongue. With the Cardinal’s blessing.

 

[netmilsmom]

otm:

Why is it that everyone wants to ignore the plain language? It could not be more clear that not only was a norm expressed clearly, but furthermore, those who do not follow the norm are to be counseled.

And it constantly amuses me that the liberals appeal to their own sensibilities as to what they wish for liturgical postures and are condemned, while the conservatives appeal to their own sensibilites as to what they wish for liturgical postures, and hold themselves out as having more authority, more right, more holiness and piety. Why the carping about “They don’t follow the rubrics” and the crowing about how they flaunt the personalization of their changes?

The problem with your response is three fold.

1. This posture IS actually addressed. Unlike holding hands at the Our Father or the Orans position at that time, (which is what conservatives have a problem with) which are NOT addressed in the GIRM but are in other Vatican documents. Liberals (your word) assume that because they don’t see it in the GIRM, they can disregard the other documents.
2. I gave and example where Arinze stated that the posture should not be assumed to be rigid. The issues that the Liberals (again your word) choose to ignore those documents that state what they are doing is, for example, “For the celebrant”. When putting in an innovation, one must check all the documents.
3. Each Bishop is to shepherd to his flock. We must do more than look at a general document if one needs to find out. Call the office because some Bishops see things differently from the group. Your Bishop is your last word. Either way.

In our parish, we are allowed to kneel. To say to me that I must stand is not what my Bishop has stated. Just because a person must be counciled does not mean counciled to stand. That is up to the Bishop as to what the counciling will resolve.