Why Kneel for Communion

[FrancisB]

But the Roman Church are in areas right now that are not Roman in culture nor part of the Western World. So your argument would go against a Roman Church forcing Western Traditions on, say Japan, China, Thailand, etc.

Right. We need more rites, not fewer.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Perhaps part of the problem, though, is that we haven’t created different Western Rites to allow for some variation. We are, essentially, imposing Italian rules on American Catholicism, aren’t we? That wasn’t the way things always were. There were different liturgical traditions in the West throughout the Middle Ages. They were just forced to disappear over time. As to how many of them used CITH, you already mentioned that the Franciscans did, so clearly it is part of the Western tradition in some form.

In the past it was always a new particular Church in every area. In an ideal sense, there should be an American Church, Chinese Church, Japanese Church, etc., each incorporating traditions of each culture into worship, the same way the Apostles did it in the First Century.

But let us not forget that CITH is not the normative practice even in the OF or that this thread is not a comparison of CITH and COTT. It is about standing versus kneeling.

Traditionalists always link standing and CITH, even though many receive COTT standing or in some rare instance people receive CITH kneeling. And there isn’t really anything that would prevent one to kneel and receive CITH.

 

[FrancisB]

Traditionalists always link standing and CITH, even though many receive COTT standing or in some rare instance people receive CITH kneeling. And there isn’t really anything that would prevent one to kneel and receive CITH.

Let us not make sweeping generalisations about traditionalists, Constantine.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Let us not make sweeping generalisations about traditionalists, Constantine.

Apologies, its not a negative knock on them. Traditionalists want kneeling and COTT. Therefore standing and CITH are seen as the “enemy” and they were introduced roughly around the same time (give or take a decade).

 

[At_Trent]

I know this Bishop. He visited the studios of RealCatholicTV, you can see a video from him on the site under the Shepherd’s Voice show. I had the great grace of being his driver for the day when he came to visit us. Never in my life have I ever been in the presence of someone who just exuded holiness as he does. I got to visit with him again when he was in town for Call to Holiness a couple years ago. What a wonderful man, and truly a good Bishop.

If all Bishops were like this I can guarantee you there would be no standing for Holy Communion.

Read his book - Dominus est - It Is the Lord: Reflections of a Bishop of Central Asia on Holy Communion. It should be required reading for every single Catholic.

Go here to purchase the book: opusangelorum.org/Books/Books.html

Don’t go to Amazon, it’s $60 or some crazy thing.

~Liza

What I’d give to greet him on bended knee ! Thanks for the link, I haven’t read it, but have been waiting for it sine I found the video a year or so ago.

Indeed, Dominus Est !

 

[At_Trent]

For one thing, the design of communion was altogether different in the early church.

disciplesnow.com/articles/43

Thanks for the link Always looking for these sources !

 

[At_Trent]

Tell that to the Chaldeans and Coptics.
Further, tell all Eastern Catholics what you think about receiving Communion standing.

Yes, but we are discussing the RC norm

 

[ConstantineTG]

Yes, but we are discussing the RC norm

But his statement is not fair. Can you call a posture bad and limit it to being bad to one Rite? The Church herself never uses such words to describe things that may not apply to one Rite. For example, the use of leavened bread is called illicit in the Roman Rite, but never “bad”. Why? Because it has implications within the Church. Why is it bad only for one Rite and suddenly good in another?

 

[Layman]

CITH wasn’t introduced because we wanted to introduce a Chaldean or Coptic tradition into the Roman Church.

Then why was it introduced?

 

[ProVobis]

But his statement is not fair. Can you call a posture bad and limit it to being bad to one Rite?

So is it fair that there are different rites, different customs, different traditions, and different forms within the Church? You are always free to attend any Catholic rite to meet your Sunday obligation so I think it’s fair from that perspective. Your argument that just because one rite does it means that all rites should do it doesn’t hold much water. What if most in those in those rites you allude to would like for there to be COTT only and they use the former practices in the Latin Rite as their basis?

 

[SunnaB16]

Don’t forget that the thread also is about kneeling, not CITH vs. COTT. The two are not the same topic…

The very quote you put up says: “…COTT and kneeling…”.

And the location of the thread seems quite irrelevant.*** Do you really want everyone to agree on the threads? What kind of discussion would occur if every post was “we should kneel while taking communion.”*** “Oh, I quite agree. It’s very nice.” And then perhaps to add a little flare, “It makes me angry that some churches have stopped kneeling for communion.” Without dissenting ideas, no discussion can take place. The position of Devil’s Advocate is quite Catholic, my friend.

???!!!
That quote says: “Personally,*** i wouldnt advocate banning outright CITH and standing,*** but id encourage COTT and kneeling…”
There was nothing about FORCING COTT and kneeling.

So: what`s your gripe?

Precisely how have they (the bishops) been obstructive?

Precisely by ignoring our rightful requests.
As stated earlier, they stonewall. Very effective!
Some of them like to talk down to us.

Name names.

And get kicked out of here?
But, without naming him, our own local bishop has done just that. By the way, Australia is a sovereign State, independent of the USA.

Some of Damian Thompsons "Holy Smoke" blogs from, say, 2 years ago, and more recently, would show the UK scene. Maybe Fr. Raymond Blakes “Saint Mary Magdalen” Brighton, UK. Fr. Zs "What Does The Prayer Really Say?" Keep your ear to the ground. No doubt, if you bother to google, youd find some in the USA: Orange County?

Such ramblings usually are. Sorry, but it`s true.

Ever thought that your hyped up swipe at ProVobis @ Post #68 might qualify as “ramblings”?

My convictions are just as valid as yours.
Maybe i have a greater sense of the Transcendent than you have.
In any case, would it be possible for you to be less personal?
Try re-reading your own posts!

Some people here like dishing it out; but they don`t like receiving.
You can purchase steel-capped boots from a workwear supplier.

 

[plefe]

well, the new Churches being built dont even have kneelers of any kind anymore. so, if you want to kneel, you would have to go to a Tradiitional Mass. as the new churches continue to be built, the people no longer even know that once we were supposed to kneel. this is the plan. to do away wiht the kneelers eventually.

That is so obvious isn’t it? I kneel whether there is carpet or kneeling rail.

 

[At_Trent]

But his statement is not fair. Can you call a posture bad and limit it to being bad to one Rite? The Church herself never uses such words to describe things that may not apply to one Rite. For example, the use of leavened bread is called illicit in the Roman Rite, but never “bad”. Why? Because it has implications within the Church. Why is it bad only for one Rite and suddenly good in another?

I don’t know of, nor care how our fellow Christian churches receive. I’m Roman Catholic, and this is a topic specifically pointed toward the Latin Rite, posted on a RC forum

I can’t judge the Eastern Churches. I accept them, but must focus on my own. I’m still learning about Her.

 

[hartleymartin]

At the Sunday evening mass at my local parish church, we had a lovely time distributing holy communion.

We had one priest, one religious brother (about to enter seminary studies and is an acolyte), one acolyte, and one EMHC (me, but I was also altar-serving - so I was wearing a white alb) - so nearly all ordinary ministers - I keep missing out on the courses to become an acolyte, despite having done 95% of the training. It’s one of those things that I’ll have to get around to finishing… along with a proper discernment about priesthood, the college degree, teaching diploma…

 

[hartleymartin]

Oh, and for the record - I have elected to receive communion on the tongue.

Fr Rutler:
“What do you think is the worst problem in the world today?”

Mother Teresa:
“Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand.”

As reported by Fr. George Rutler in his 1989 Good Friday sermon at St. Agnes Church, New York. When Mother Teresa of Calcutta was asked by Fr. Rutler, without pausing a second she gave the above reply. She stated that to her knowledge, all of her sisters receive Communion only on the tongue.

That was what inspired me to change. I had been brought up and instructed only to receive in the hand. For me, I have a greater feeling of honour and respect for God by receiving on the tongue. Both COTT and CITH are permissible in the church today. So it really is a matter of choice.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I don’t know of, nor care how our fellow Christian churches receive. I’m Roman Catholic, and this is a topic specifically pointed toward the Latin Rite, posted on a RC forum

I can’t judge the Eastern Churches. I accept them, but must focus on my own. I’m still learning about Her.

And being Catholic, Roman or otherwise, we should be charitable. We can’t make sweeping statements about a practice that happens within our own Church and say, “hey, this is bad in the Roman Church but good elsewhere.” A practice is either good or bad, universally. You can’t compare receiving Communion standing to receiving bread from bread lines and not think about implications of the statement outside your own space. That is just uncharitable and insensitive.

 

[ConstantineTG]

So is it fair that there are different rites, different customs, different traditions, and different forms within the Church? You are always free to attend any Catholic rite to meet your Sunday obligation so I think it’s fair from that perspective. Your argument that just because one rite does it means that all rites should do it doesn’t hold much water. What if most in those in those rites you allude to would like for there to be COTT only and they use the former practices in the Latin Rite as their basis?

Whats not fair is calling one tradition or practice “bad” when clearly other people do it and it is in fact “good”. I’m not saying that all rites should do what one rite does, but we have no right to call something bad when it is a practice within another rite in our Church.

 

[At_Trent]

And being Catholic, Roman or otherwise, we should be charitable. We can’t make sweeping statements about a practice that happens within our own Church and say, “hey, this is bad in the Roman Church but good elsewhere.” A practice is either good or bad, universally. You can’t compare receiving Communion standing to receiving bread from bread lines and not think about implications of the statement outside your own space. That is just uncharitable and insensitive.

Not insensitive in the least. This discussion concerns the Latin Rite, per the OP.

Let me go over to Eastern and proceed to tell them what I think they should do and see how long it lasts. If I did THAT it would be insensitive.

Nothing I said was uncharitable. I don’t care what they do because I’m not them and I don’t know enough about them to discuss their traditions. It’s none of my business. Besides, the only time I asked a question over there, it was only after the 8 - 9th reply I got an answer. I thanked the person who answered and left.

What’s insensitive is the derailing of specific Latin Rite topics.

Pax tecum

 

[ProVobis]

A practice is either good or bad, universally.

So what one wears (or doesn’t wear) in one culture should be accepted in all cultures? I’m sure you didn’t mean that.

 

[ConstantineTG]

So what one wears (or doesn’t wear) in one culture should be accepted in all cultures? I’m sure you didn’t mean that.

I mean that too. Sure, wearing say a Hakama is formal wear for Japanese. You may not expect one to come wearing one in a black tie event in New York City. But you certainly can’t call wearing the Hakama bad. Making a comment that wearing a Hakama is like going to a Karate tournament is inappropriate, insensitive and uncharitable, even though you are in a black-tie event. I’m not saying we should start welcoming foreign practices, but we shouldn’t also be making sweeping statements that would be uncharitable to them.