Your opinion on Posture for Reception of Communion

[Mysty101]

TNT:

I never said they SHOULD NOT STAND, did I? NO.

No, but for the unity of posture and the reverent procession, all must be standing, especially since the kneelers can stand, while all the standees cannot kneel. You keep denying this reason in order to hurl some accusations at the Shepherds of the US.

 

[TNT]

Mysty101:

No, but for the unity of posture and the reverent procession, all must be standing, especially since the kneelers can stand, while all the standees cannot kneel. You keep denying this reason in order to hurl some accusations at the Shepherds of the US.

“**unity of posture and the reverent procession, all must be standing…”
So, the TLM indult is, by this measure or command, disunified AND irreverant?
** 1. Unity should not exclude charity to the majority. again you did not address the “exception does not make the rule”. I do not expect you to. You also ignore your own poll results to this point. Why have a poll if the majoity in the poll have no effect, but only the exception or the minority??

1. I do not need to “hurl accusations” at the US “shepherds”. There are more than 40 Criminal District attorneys in that process right now. More than 16 “shepherds” have resigned and admitted to those accusations. My “accusations” would be a tempest in-a-teacup.
   
   Can a "shepherd violate Charity ? You bet. It’s done all the time.

In the end, my solution of allowing standing exceptions is charity to BOTH. Yours merely commands all no matter what happens to Charity, or Faith for that matter.

 

[krazykatlady]

Mysty101:

Wouldn’t that be you “kneel, if there are provisions, and have not been instructed to kneel.”?

I guess I didn’t make myself clear. Some people were kneeling or genuflecting when they received Communion and our priest instructed us not to do that. So I stand at the Novus Ordo but gratefully kneel at the Indult.

 

[Mysty101]

"unity of posture and the reverent procession, all must be standing…"
So, the TLM indult is, by this measure or command, disunified AND irreverant?
1. Unity should not exclude charity to the majority. again you did not address the “exception does not make the rule”. I do not expect you to. You also ignore your own poll results to this point. Why have a poll if the majoity in the poll have no effect, but only the exception or the minority??

1. I do not need to “hurl accusations” at the US “shepherds”. There are more than 40 Criminal District attorneys in that process right now. More than 16 “shepherds” have resigned and admitted to those accusations. My “accusations” would be a tempest in-a-teacup.
   
   Can a "shepherd violate Charity ? You bet. It’s done all the time.

In the end, my solution of allowing standing exceptions is charity to BOTH. Yours merely commands all no matter what happens to Charity, or Faith for that matter.

I sincerely hope you find the peace you so despretely need in regard to your Pastors and Bishops.

Love & Prayers,

 

[Mysty101]

krazykatlady:

I guess I didn’t make myself clear. Some people were kneeling or genuflecting when they received Communion and our priest instructed us not to do that. So I stand at the Novus Ordo but gratefully kneel at the Indult.

This is a healthy attitude.

Love & Prayers,

 

[otm]

RedCrossKnight:

According to this statement from the GIRM, IMHO, one should not take the consecrated host in one’s hand.

I would knee if I could, but I do as we are told out of obedience to the Bishop.

You are confusing “take” with “receive”. To “take” is to reach out and pick up.

 

[otm]

The best kept SECRET in the Newchurch is:
:***the reasons ***for this norm…"

 I tried on multiple threads to get someone, anyone, even a priest to give clearly those reasons.............dead silence.
 Only one gave a proposed answer, indirectly from the document of VATII:
 **  ** **In Short: Ecumenism
 ** **Ecumenism**: The tearing apart of the INSIDE to gain acceptance from the OUTSIDE. (TNT)

It has nothing to do with Ecuminism. It has to do with postures, and there are those who seem to believe, or more correctly, “feel”, that Kneeling is the most reverant posture. If it was, we would kneel during the reading of the Gospel and the recitation of the Creed. Standing is also a sign of respect, which is at least partially related to reverence.

 

[otm]

john ennis:

I infer from this that the Church’s formal instruction can be ignored whenever we suspect its intentions are inappropriate. And moreover, until we get an answer regarding “the reasons for this norm,” we can assume the Holy Spirit is not speaking to us on this matter.
Peace.
John

Right. that is called cafeteria catholicism, as practiced by the liberals. They do it with regularity.

 

[TNT]

Mysty101:

I sincerely hope you find the peace you so despretely need in regard to your Pastors and Bishops.

Love & Prayers,

Of course I am. I attend only an approved TLM, where the same disciplines have been in effect, essentially for 800 years. I can concentrate 100% on the Mass as it unfolds, and never need to give a thought to how it will be carried out and who will be “outside” of obedience this week, or whether the GIRM is being followed, ad infinitum.
**Tremendous consolation. Don’t you think?
My prayers back to you. I will offer a special Rosary for your intentions after Mass before the Blessed Sacrament which is right in the center of the Altar.

**

 

[Mysty101]

otm:

Right. that is called cafeteria catholicism, as practiced by the liberals. They do it with regularity.

Not only liberals—SSPX is a good example of traditional Cafeteria Catholics.

And there are many others (conservative a well as liberals) who believe we should only follow the rules with which we agree, and only respect those in authority who are saying what we want to hear.

 

[Ecce_Homo]

I posted the following before in a different thread. I bring it up again because I would like to make a different point about it.

Pope John Paul II, in his 1980 encyclical Inaestimabile Donum stated:

With regard to the manner of going to Communion, the faithful can receive it either kneeling or standing, in accordance with the norms laid down by the episcopal conference: “**When the faithful communicate kneeling, no other sign of reverence towards the Blessed Sacrament is required, since kneeling is itself a sign of adoration. **[Ecce Homo’s emphasis] When they receive Communion standing, it is strongly recommended that, coming up in procession, they should make a sign of reverence before receiving the Sacrament. This should be done at the right time and place, so that the order of people going to and from Communion is not disrupted.”

Sacred Congregation of Rites, Instruction Eucharisticum Mysterium, no. 34. Cf. Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, nos. 244 c, 246 b, 247 b.

Implicit in the emphasized sentence is that postures, such as standing, are not themselves acts of adoration–hence the additional requirement of a sign of reverence. But concerning kneeling, the Pope clearly states that it is a sign of adoration. It seems to me the Pope is saying is that kneeling, of itself, is an appropriate posture for receiving Communion, whereas standing, by itself, is lacking.

Remove for a moment the context of the American norm for receiving Communion. If you were free to receive Christ in any posture you desired, wouldn’t you rather receive in a posture of adoration than some other posture?

Now restore that context. Why would the bishops in America choose for the faithful to receive in a posture other than one of adoration if they truly desired what is best for their flock? It is not my intention to question the motives of our bishops, but I cannot reasonably understand their disapproval of kneeling–a posture most suitable for receiving the Eucharist.

The question of obedience to pastors and bishops is important, but when the Pope has expressed his approval of kneeling to receive Communion, kneeling when local bishops disapprove is not disobedience.

 

[Kielbasi]

Standing is the way its done here.

There may well be places where kneeling is still practiced, but I haven’t seen it for many a moon.

 

[JakeW]

Ecce Homo:

I posted the following before in a different thread. I bring it up again because I would like to make a different point about it.

Pope John Paul II, in his 1980 encyclical Inaestimabile Donum stated:

Implicit in the emphasized sentence is that postures, such as standing, are not themselves acts of adoration–hence the additional requirement of a sign of reverence. But concerning kneeling, the Pope clearly states that it is a sign of adoration. It seems to me the Pope is saying is that kneeling, of itself, is an appropriate posture for receiving Communion, whereas standing, by itself, is lacking.

Remove for a moment the context of the American norm for receiving Communion. If you were free to receive Christ in any posture you desired, wouldn’t you rather receive in a posture of adoration than some other posture?

Now restore that context. Why would the bishops in America choose for the faithful to receive in a posture other than one of adoration if they truly desired what is best for their flock? It is not my intention to question the motives of our bishops, but I cannot reasonably understand their disapproval of kneeling–a posture most suitable for receiving the Eucharist.

The question of obedience to pastors and bishops is important, but when the Pope has expressed his approval of kneeling to receive Communion, kneeling when local bishops disapprove is not disobedience.

GREAT POST!!

 

[JakeW]

Kielbasi:

Standing is the way its done here.

There may well be places where kneeling is still practiced, but I haven’t seen it for many a moon.

We still have a communion rail at our parish. We kneel. It is our “custom” here to buckle our knees before receiving our Lord.

In regards to person who said (paraphrasing)… “why should we kneel at communion, we don’t at the Gospel or the Creed, do we??”…Honest to goodness, do you put the Gospel reading and our Creed (very very important parts of the Mass of course) on the same level of importance as the presentation, consecration, and then RECEPTION of the TRULY PRESENT BODY, BLOOD, SOUL, and DIVINITY, OUR LORD??

 

[Mysty101]

Ecce Homo:

The question of obedience to pastors and bishops is important, but when the Pope has expressed his approval of kneeling to receive Communion, kneeling when local bishops disapprove is not disobedience.

This document is from 1980—the practical situation has changed greatly in 25 years. In RS the Pope has restated the need for norms

Liturgical norms are necessary because “in liturgy full public worship is performed by the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, that is, by the Head and by his members. From this it follows that every liturgical celebration, because it is an action of Christ the priest and of his Body the Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others” …
“priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to these norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church”

authority of the Bishops

1. “The regulation of the Sacred Liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, which rests specifically with the Apostolic See and, according to the norms of law, with the Bishop.”34

And the posture for Holy Communion

1. “The faithful should receive Communion kneeling or standing, as the Conference of Bishops will have determined,” with its acts having received the recognitio of the Apostolic See. “However, if they receive Communion standing, it is recommended that they give due reverence before the reception of the Sacrament, as set forth in the same norms.”176

And the GIRM does state

Movements and Posture
42. … Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.

 

[Ecce_Homo]

Mysty101:

This document is from 1980—the practical situation has changed greatly in 25 years. In RS the Pope has restated the need for norms

In what way has the practical situation changed so greatly these past 25 years? I don’t see how the practical considerations of receiving Communion have changed in any significant way in hundreds of years.

Even prior to recent changes, there were provisions for the sick (and others who could not kneel) to receive commonion in a non-kneeling posture. The exceptions have always been provided for.

Which leads me to the question, “Why change the norms?” What happened in the last half century that such substantial changes were required? The results of these changes have been anything but unifying. The faithful are now asked to dispose of an ancient and beautiful expression of reverence and adoration to fulfill the wishes of their bishops. Is it any wonder, there is so much confusion?

Yes, we need norms…all the more reason not to change them.

 

[CrusaderNY]

Forget about what you see other people do, or what the so called “Options are” in the GIRM as that is as watered down as the rest…kneel, you are at Mass and are about to receive our Lord , if you were told that Jesus was going to be at the 10AM mass and you waited all your life to meet him, would you go up to him and shake his hand standing up,receiving him in your hand like a hot dog at a ball game?

NO-You would get on your knees look up into those beautiful eyes of his…and if he was to give you a piece of his body to take, you would take it direct from his worthy and consecrated hands (ie the Priest ) and put it directly into your mouth and Love him…

Forget about all of this post V2 garbage…we all know what is right and wrong, and when I go to my NO mass, I get on line with the PRIEST and NOT the Eucharistic Minister, and while everyone else is standing…I get down on the hard tile floor and kneel and receive him, as does my wife and family, and you know what…more and more people at my mass I notice after they see me do that then do the same…

Mysty101:

Given the instruction from the GIRM
Do you think it is OK to kneel to receive Holy Communion, especially if there are no provisions?

 

[pnewton]

CrusaderNY:

Forget about what you see other people do, or what the so called “Options are” in the GIRM as that is as watered down as the rest…kneel…

Forget about all of this post V2 garbage…

Forget the GIRM and church leaders and listen to anonymous internet posters???

Reverence is required not posturing. A reverent and penitent Catholic who is humbly following what his bishop directs is prefered to an arrogant Catholic who kneels for the show of it. Conversely, one who feels compelled by conscience to kneel with a humble and contrite heart is prefered to one who stands and receives with the attitude of a fast-food drive-thru window.

What we (Catholics) do not do is ignore or church leadership. This is one thing that separates us from protestants.

 

[Mysty101]

Ecce Homo:

In what way has the practical situation changed so greatly these past 25 years? I don’t see how the practical considerations of receiving Communion have changed in any significant way in hundreds of years.

This is not for us to decide—The authority lies with the Bishops, who have seen a need for change I have gone over the reasons many times.

Yes, we need norms…all the more reason not to change them

I am sure the exact thing was said at the time of the Council of Trent

 

[Mysty101]

pnewton:

What we (Catholics) do not do is ignore or church leadership. This is one thing that separates us from protestants.

Amen