Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No-Kneeling Rule Sparks Widespread Outcry
National Catholic Register ^ | Sept. 29-Oct. 5, 2002 | JOHN BURGER

Posted on 10/08/2002 4:00:51 PM PDT by nickcarraway

LINCOLN, Neb. - A new directive on the posture for receiving Communion is being implemented in a way that those who wish to receive kneeling are often humiliated.

The new directive merely codifies what has been a practice since the 1960s, and it isn't meant to prevent those who still receive kneeling, usually at an altar rail, from doing so.

Nevertheless, Adoremus Bulletin editor Helen Hull Hitchcock and EWTN news anchorman Raymond Arroyo said they have heard from people all over the country who are being forced to stand.

"We've gotten a lot of reports from Southern California of people being interfered with, told they must stand during the distribution of Communion, stand until everyone has received and refused Communion if they knelt," Hitchcock said.

The July issue of the U.S. bishops' Committee on the Liturgy newsletter says that kneeling is "not a licit posture for receiving holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States of America unless the bishop of a particular diocese has derogated from this norm in an individual and extraordinary circumstance."

In fact, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Neb., "has given a derogation so people can kneel if they prefer," said Father Mark Huber, chancellor. "There has been a lot of confusion" about the new norm, said Father Huber, who speculated that there will "probably be enough questions sent to Rome to lead them to make a clarification."

The new norm comes out of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM), a set of directives on how to celebrate and assist at Mass. Published with the new edition of the Roman Missal, the GIRM says communicants may receive standing or kneeling, as established by the bishops' conference.

The U.S. bishops requested a number of other adaptations to the GIRM. Before approving them, Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez, prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, insisted that the bishops add a clarification that communicants should not be denied the Eucharist because they kneel. The adaptation says that instances of people kneeling should be addressed pastorally "by providing the faithful with the proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm."

Cardinal Medina's letter, from Oct. 25, 2001, stated: "This dicastery [Vatican department] agrees in principle to the insertion [of the standing adaptation]. At the same time, the tenor of not a few letters received from the faithful in various dioceses of [the United States] leads the congregation … to urge the [bishop's] conference to introduce a clause that would protect those faithful who will inevitably be led by their own sensibilities to kneel, from imprudent action by priests, deacons or lay ministers in particular, or from being refused holy Communion for such a reason as happens on occasion."

Msgr. Anthony Sherman, assistant director of the bishops' Committee on the Liturgy, affirmed that one can not be refused Communion for failing to stand, but he said that people ought to "accommodate themselves to the new norms."

But insistence on standing is causing angst for many individuals and groups riding the wave of what they see as a return to traditional pious practices but which others see as nostalgia for the pre-Vatican II Church. It also is presenting a dilemma for people who are aware of the need for obedience to priests and bishops but feel a need to show respect for the Blessed Sacrament in what they consider a traditional, more reverent posture.

Parishioners at St. Patrick's Cathedral in Fort Worth, Texas, say several people have been humiliated by priests or eucharistic ministers who have insisted that the communicants stand before they are given Communion. They say their complaints to Fort Worth Bishop Joseph Delaney and Msgr. Hubert Neu, pastor of the cathedral, have not yielded satisfactory answers.

The parish council wrote to Cardinal Medina. An undersecretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship replied July 1, reiterating the stipulation that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Communion on those grounds.

"The priests have stopped coming to the altar rail," said Robert Gieb, an attorney who is president of the parish council. He pointed out that parishioners never stopped the practice of receiving at the rail after Vatican II. He said many parishioners were angered by implementation of the new norm, which started in the diocese on the solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ in June.

"The Eucharist is the heart of the Catholic faith," said parishioner Bobby Ryan, 40, who finds it hard to give up the devotional kneeling he has learned since he became a Catholic in 1995. "For people who have knelt all their lives, and a bishop saying you shouldn't kneel, there's something wrong. … I'd think it would make a bishop happy to have people in his diocese who want to kneel."

Gieb, who said he and a few other parishioners still kneel, complains of what he calls the "posture police, who want to prohibit the faithful from dropping on their knees before God."

Msgr. Neu said he does not deny or delay Communion to anyone who kneels. "We're going by the norm," he said, pointing out that the bishops want uniformity in practice. People who kneel are "going contrary to the norm, but I've given Communion to them." Bishop Delaney could not be reached for comment.

Risen With Christ

The U.S. bishops' liturgy committee, in an article titled, "Postures and Gestures at Mass," said that standing is a sign of respect and honor: "This posture, from the earliest days of the Church, has been understood as the stance of those who are risen with Christ and seek the things that are above [emphasis in original]. When we stand for prayer we assume our full stature before God, not in pride, but in humble gratitude for the marvelous thing God has done in creating and redeeming each one of us. By Baptism we have been given a share in the life of God, and the posture of standing is an acknowledgment of this wonderful gift."

Communion, said the unsigned article, one of a series of bulletin inserts on the Roman Missal, is "the sacrament which unites us in the most profound way possible with Christ who, now gloriously risen from the dead, is the cause of our salvation."

The article, which can be read on the committee's Web page (www.nccbuscc.org/liturgy/girm/bul3.htm), gives a brief overview of the history of kneeling. It says kneeling signified penance in the early Church, when kneeling was forbidden on Sundays and during the Easter Season and "the prevailing spirit of the liturgy was that of joy and thanksgiving." In the Middle Ages, kneeling signified the homage of a vassal to his lord, it said, and more recently, the posture has signified adoration. The article does not cite authorities for this historical overview.

The committee's July newsletter noted the GIRM emphasizes that in matters of gesture and posture "greater attention needs to be paid to what is laid down by liturgical law and by the traditional practice of the Roman Rite, for the sake of the common spiritual good of the people of God rather than to personal inclination or arbitrary choice."

In their consideration of the GIRM, the U.S. bishops "repeatedly recalled the need for uniformity in all prescribed postures and gestures," the newsletter said. "Such uniformity serves as a 'sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered for the sacred Liturgy' and it 'both expresses and fosters the spiritual attitude of those assisting,'" said the newsletter, quoting the GIRM. "Likewise, a lack of uniformity can serve as a sign of disunity or even a sense of individualism."

The new norm also instructs the communicant who stands to receive to bow his head before the Host or Precious Blood as a gesture of reverence. It does not say anything about genuflecting or making the sign of the cross, which some Catholics do before receiving from a priest at the head of a line.

But Bishop William Higi of Lafayette, Ind., wrote in his diocesan newspaper in June that "a person is not to genuflect before receiving." He speculated that many people genuflect in response to reports of low levels of belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

"However, the sign of reverence has now been clearly determined for the United States," he wrote in his weekly column in The Catholic Moment. "It is a bow of the head."

"Should a person insist on kneeling for the reception of holy Communion, Communion will not be denied, but they clearly will be demonstrating dissent from the mind of the Church," Bishop Higi continued. "Rather than reverence, the emphasis will be refusal to embrace particular law approved by the Vatican for the United States."

Father Gerry Pokorsky, who heads Credo, a society of priests advocating high-quality translations for the Mass, finds it "disproportionate" to insist that kneeling is "illicit" when there have been so many other problems in the Church in recent years.

As to the liturgy committee's article claiming that kneeling was an act of penance in the early Church, Father Pokorsky cites St. Paul's dictum that, "At the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow."

"That doesn't sound like penance to me, it sounds like adoration," the Arlington, Va., priest said. "Why this aversion to acts of piety? It's such a one-sided emphasis. Will the bishops now be attendant to all the liturgical abuses?"

As an example of those abuses, Father Pokorsky spoke of priests failing to perform the ritual washing of the hands after the presentation of the gifts. Other Catholics pointed out that some celebrants fail to genuflect after the consecration and lay ministers in the sanctuary often are exempted from the requirement to kneel during the Eucharistic Prayer.

What many Catholic lay people are complaining about is that priests who are cavalier themselves about following obligatory liturgical norms become draconian in enforcing an optional directive on lay people. And bishops who ignore flagrant liturgical abuses by priests promote strict adherence to liturgical norms when it comes to a common posture for lay people.

Dominican Father Giles Dimock, a former professor of liturgy and now dean of the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C., said it's helpful to have a uniform posture, but that this goal must be balanced against individual devotion and the common good.

"I would never dream of refusing Communion to someone who wants to kneel," Father Dimock said. "They feel it's necessary" to show reverence in such a way.

At the same time, communicants should be aware that Communion needs to be distributed to others in an orderly way. As a professor at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, Father Dimock was accustomed to giving Communion to students on their knees, but he said a few knelt a bit longer than a regard for others in line would allow. For those few students, the priest said, it was "like their own personal holy hour."


TOPICS: Catholic; Worship
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-124 next last

1 posted on 10/08/2002 4:00:51 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
At my RC Parish, which is Anglican Use, we all receive, kneeling at the altar rail, by intinction. It is our liturgical norm.

I thank God everyday for the Anglican Use, and pray for it's continuation. At my former RC Parish, it was one innovation upon another. Plenty of room for liberation theologists, wiccan prayers, Charismatic weirdness, and dancing girls, but if you had any conservative or traditional leanings, you were **** out of luck.

I don't think I'd ever find myself going SSPX, but if it weren't for the AU, I don't know what I'd do. I would last at the local Parish or Hospital Chapel about a month, and then I'd just lose it, totally. I am convinced that at least in the US, there are many who are trying to destroy the Catholic Church from within, and in my Archdiocese, they seem to have the upper hand.

I can see why we my Parish is busting at the seams, even so far as to having folks move here from out of state just to be able to join our Parish.

2 posted on 10/08/2002 4:30:55 PM PDT by sockmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GatorGirl; tiki; maryz; *Catholic_list; afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; Askel5; ...
Ping.
3 posted on 10/08/2002 4:32:31 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: nickcarraway
(Oops, wrong FReeper the first time...)

You beat me to posting this by mere minutes. I'll go have my thread deleted.

5 posted on 10/08/2002 4:56:05 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
EWTN Ask the Experts forum:

Genuflection before communion forbidden by bishop

Question from Dr. Brian J. Kopp on 12-13-1998:

Dear Father,

Below is a letter our local Bishop just sent to all the priests in this Diocese (Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown, PA) in which, for all intents and purposes, he forbids genuflection before receiving the Eucharist. The specific paragraph is directly below in quotes:

"Should an individual of this Diocesan Church wish to make a further sign of reverence just prior to receiving Holy Communion, that sign is to be that of the sign of the cross. In any case, making the sign of the cross in silence should precede receiving Holy Communion rather than follow. Thus, in order to seek uniformity of movement and posture, I direct the sign of the cross to be the sign of reverence prior to the reception of Holy Communion.

Uniformity in Liturgy is desirable as a sign of our unity in Jesus Christ. It expresses our oneness in the Eucharistic Lord and of our reverence and love for the Sacrament of the Lord's Body and Blood. This uniformity of word and movement will enhance the expression of our liturgical celebration of unity in Christ as we of the one Household gather around the one table and eat and drink the one bread and cup that is Jesus the Lord."

Can he do this? Are the faithful who practice genuflection before Communion required to be obedient to this "Directive," which seems to be a denial of our right, expressed by Fr. Regis Scanlon, OFM in a file in EWTN's library online, to show a form of "latria" at reception of Communion? Any help you can offer would be appreciated.

Dr. Brian J. Kopp
Johnstown, PA

Answer by Fr. John Trigilio on 12-14-1998:

SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM (Vatican II) said:
"#22 (1) Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See, and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. (2) In virtue of power conceded by law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of bishops' conferences, legitimately established, with competence in given territories. (3) Therefore no other person, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority."

The General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM) #21 says:

"However, it is for the Bishops' Conference to adapt the postures and gestures here described as suitable for the Roman Mass"

EUCHARISTICUM MYSTERIUM # 4 and INAESTIMABILE DONUM # 11 state that to receive Holy Communion kneeling is a sign of reverence in itself. When not
kneeling, SOME form of reverence is encouraged. The Bishop can even REQUIRE it.

My reading of the texts, however, is that while the Bishop has the authority to mandate that some form of reverence be given when receiving Holy Communion while standing, he can only say that the sign of the cross is the bare MINIMUM but he cannot say that a genuflection is not allowed. The law affords him parameters on what is the minimum required but he does not have the authority to curtail the EXTRA reverence given by a genuflection. ONLY the Holy See itself or the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) can do that, as stated above. Hence, the local bishop can say that in his diocese, AT LEAST the sign of the Cross will be made prior to receiving Holy Communion OR he could require a bow of the head or he could mandate a genuflection. My reading of the law, however, is that an individual bishop does not have the prerogative of the Episcopal Conference or the Holy See to prohibit someone from going beyond the minimum requirement WITHIN REASON. Ergo, someone cannot disrupt the Communion line by kneeling for a long period of time (they should do that in the pew or at the altar rail). To
exclude genuflection seems to go beyond the scope the law allows. Msgr. Peter Elliott agrees with this in his book, "Liturgical Question Box, p. 114 (copyright 1998, Ignatius Press) and again in his book "Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite", #336 (copyright 1995, Ignatius Press)

For him to proscribe genuflection would be as unlawful as to prescribe someone to stay standing. The law does not give that much latitude to any one pastor or bishop. The unity and uniformity of liturgical gestures is not limited to the parish or even the diocese but since we live in the Catholic church, it should be a more universal unity and uniformity. Hence, the law is clear that Rome on behalf of the universal church and the Episcopal
Conference on behalf of the nation can make such decisions.
--Fr. Trigilio
6 posted on 10/08/2002 5:04:10 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Boys are being raped throughout the Church, and bishops feel compelled to use their precious time and authority (those who are not already laughing-stocks) to keep people from reverencing Christ.
7 posted on 10/08/2002 5:07:42 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Fellow Catholics...
8 posted on 10/08/2002 5:26:03 PM PDT by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Catholicguy
How many versions of your normative Mass are floating about these days? They seem to vary quite immensely on all levels: parish, diocese, archdiocese, country, etc. Are they all legitmate and equally pleasing to God, except for that dreadful, so consistent Indult that you hope the next Pope abolishes?
9 posted on 10/08/2002 5:38:07 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
I'm an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist, and I would never refuse Holy Communion to anyone who is kneeling before God. There is no one in our Parish who does so, but there are some who genuflect before receiving and I just wait until they are done. Most folks in our Parish receive in the hand but there are a few who receive on the tongue. I don't understand why this would be a problem to the Bishops, these folks are certainly not bothering anyone.

The ones I have trouble with are the ones who try to snatch the host from my hand, or those who barely raise their hands and open them, then amble halfway down the aisle before they put it in their mouths. But the most disconcerting thing I've seen so far (and I forgot to tell our Pastor about last week) was the woman who broke off a piece of the host to give to her little daughter who was about 3 because the little girl was running alongside her mother whining! We need a sermon on the proper attitude for receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus!

10 posted on 10/08/2002 5:55:42 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Communion will not be denied, but they clearly will be demonstrating dissent from the mind of the Church," Bishop Higi continued. "Rather than reverence, the emphasis will be refusal to embrace particular law approved by the Vatican for the United States."


This is tooooo much!
11 posted on 10/08/2002 6:06:21 PM PDT by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
I saw a report that Archbishop Loverde came to Christendom College recently, and after he saw all the students kneeling at the altar rail, he said that they were "insufficiently catechized" and that they needed to be instructed to receive communion standing.

I haven't seen this report elsewhere, so I wonder if anyone else has heard the same thing, and if they know what the result has been?
12 posted on 10/08/2002 6:11:10 PM PDT by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Father Pokorsky cites St. Paul's dictum that, "At the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow."


"That doesn't sound like penance to me, it sounds like adoration," the Arlington, Va., priest said. "Why this aversion to acts of piety? It's such a one-sided emphasis. Will the bishops now be attendant to all the liturgical abuses?"

Good point!
13 posted on 10/08/2002 6:11:25 PM PDT by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
I haven't seen this report elsewhere, so I wonder if anyone else has heard the same thing, and if they know what the result has been?

The result should be that those who want to kneel at the Communion rail should be able to, and those who don't want to, should stand.

I'm all for options, as long the Novus Ordo remains the normative Mass.

14 posted on 10/08/2002 6:21:43 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
Loverde is not an "archbishop," by the way. His metropolitan is McCarrick.
15 posted on 10/08/2002 6:23:01 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
..."What many Catholic lay people are complaining about is that priests who are cavalier themselves about following obligatory liturgical norms become draconian in enforcing an optional directive on lay people. And bishops who ignore flagrant liturgical abuses by priests promote strict adherence to liturgical norms when it comes to a common posture for lay people."

This is exactly my problem with this "no kneeling" business... have the bishops cracked down on the liberal liturgical abuses, NO! Now they want to crack down on people kneeling or genuflecting? What's wrong with this picture?

16 posted on 10/08/2002 6:32:19 PM PDT by vita_brevis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Thanks for the post.
17 posted on 10/08/2002 6:50:35 PM PDT by Lady In Blue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irisshlass
Does this mean sackcloth and ashes are straight out?

Just kidding...

18 posted on 10/08/2002 6:57:00 PM PDT by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Irisshlass
Of course it is too much. Genuflecting and kneeling recognizes the Real Presence. The idea is for the memory of the Real Presence to fade with the passing generations. This is just another step in the auto-demolition of Catholicism. Still think Archbishop Lefebvre got it wrong?
19 posted on 10/08/2002 7:00:01 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
They are getting bolder on the left--and Rome, as usual, goes along. They clearly want to do away with the old faith. You wouldn't mind if they had a track record of some kind. But they've produced nothing good for forty years.
20 posted on 10/08/2002 7:03:33 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I'm all for options, as long the Novus Ordo remains the normative Mass.

14 posted on 10/8/02 6:21 PM Pacific by sinkspur

Do you know what 'normative' means? In this use, it means prevalent or most widely attended. If people choose to attend other approved forms of the Mass and you can still choose to attend a Novus Mass, does it really matter if it is normative?

If you answer in the affirmative, why do you feel so?

Sursum Corda

21 posted on 10/08/2002 7:09:15 PM PDT by Sursum Corda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sursum Corda
If people choose to attend other approved forms of the Mass and you can still choose to attend a Novus Mass, does it really matter if it is normative.

Yes. The Novus Ordo has been normative for over 30 years.

Does it matter to you if the Novus Ordo is normative?

22 posted on 10/08/2002 7:13:14 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Sursum Corda
Actually, in this use "normative" means the Mass that has been sanctioned by Rome as the Mass to celebrated on all but the most extraordinary conditions.

The Tridentine Liturgy is permitted, with the permission of the local bishop. The bishop should be generous in granting permission.

23 posted on 10/08/2002 7:16:20 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey
My parish uses kneeling at the Communion rail and it's not Anglican use.
24 posted on 10/08/2002 7:33:55 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Flying Circus
ping
25 posted on 10/08/2002 7:34:10 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
You did not answer my question about why it matters to you if the Novus Ordo is normative, as long as you can still attend that form of Mass.

FWIW, the Tridentine is not the only option for Catholics, there are a number of other rites or uses.

We differ on the common understanding of what 'normative' means, but it may be but hair splitting on both our parts.

Sursum Corda

26 posted on 10/08/2002 7:41:29 PM PDT by Sursum Corda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: sinkspur
The Tridentine Liturgy is permitted, with the permission of the local bishop. The bishop should be generous in granting permission.

And, if the bishop is not generous and does not grant permisson for the Tridentine Mass, is he disobeying the Pope?

28 posted on 10/08/2002 8:10:46 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
And, if the bishop is not generous and does not grant permisson for the Tridentine Mass, is he disobeying the Pope?

I don't know. Our bishop couldn't get anybody to celebrate the Tridentine Liturgy until early this year. After he did, there are still only about 100 people at the Mass on Sundays.

29 posted on 10/08/2002 8:14:43 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
"There has been a lot of confusion" about the new norm, said Father Huber, who speculated that there will "probably be enough questions sent to Rome to lead them to make a clarification."

The Pope has already said that there must be some sort of act of reverence at the recieving of Communion. That's is why you see people genuflecting when they have to stand to recieve Communion. Watch EWTN. Lots of people genuflect. My parish is used to seeing many people genuflect.

To me it is indeed a joy when I am at a Mass where kneeling at the Communion rail is still allowed. I feel like I am home.

You'd think that all parishes would welcome true reverence for Jesus. Lord knows with all the Church is having to endure, some people reverently praying should be thought to help the situation.

30 posted on 10/08/2002 8:39:52 PM PDT by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: HDMZ
Friggin' lunatic.
33 posted on 10/08/2002 9:04:34 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Comment #34 Removed by Moderator

To: HDMZ
Don't overdo the joke.
35 posted on 10/08/2002 9:20:26 PM PDT by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Hmmmm.....Interesting.

The Hitchcocks are members of the parish where I've been going. The altar rail is still there, but nobody uses it right now.

36 posted on 10/08/2002 9:45:09 PM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Cardinal Medina's letter, from Oct. 25, 2001, stated: "This dicastery [Vatican department] agrees in principle to the insertion [of the standing adaptation].

What a surprise: the Vatican agreeing that kneeling is "not a licit posture for receiving holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States of America unless the bishop of a particular diocese has derogated from this norm in an individual and extraordinary circumstance" in principle.

37 posted on 10/09/2002 12:36:21 AM PDT by Dajjal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Great! LOL!!!
38 posted on 10/09/2002 12:37:54 AM PDT by Dajjal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
Boys are being raped throughout the Church, and bishops feel compelled to use their precious time and authority (those who are not already laughing-stocks) to keep people from reverencing Christ.

Dittoes!

39 posted on 10/09/2002 12:43:29 AM PDT by Dajjal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
"The altar rail is still there, but nobody uses it right now. "

Our church built in the within the last 20years doesn't even have an altar rail.

Except for my own first Holy Communion I can't recall the last time I saw anyone kneeling to recieve.

My kids have never seen this, sadly.......

40 posted on 10/09/2002 5:32:11 AM PDT by SunnyUsa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Polycarp,

#4 is an infantile post and I hope you will ask the moderator to remove it.

N
41 posted on 10/09/2002 6:30:09 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
My parish uses kneeling at the Communion rail and it's not Anglican use.

IMHO, you are fortunate. I am guessing that more Catholic Churches don't use them than do, or have yanked them out altogether...
And don't get me started on the Churches that yank out the Holy Water during Lent, and replace it with kitty litter, or little cactus gardens.

42 posted on 10/09/2002 6:43:27 AM PDT by sockmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey
And don't get me started on the Churches that yank out the Holy Water during Lent, and replace it with kitty litter, or little cactus gardens.


What????
43 posted on 10/09/2002 6:52:11 AM PDT by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: HDMZ
Oh Good Grief!!!
44 posted on 10/09/2002 6:55:02 AM PDT by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
#4 is an infantile post and I hope you will ask the moderator to remove it.

I agree, but as an FYI, that is an actual photograph of the Episcopal Bishop of the US, taken in 1997, and here is the caption which went with it:
photo by Bernard Thomas, The Herald-Sun
The Rev. James Gary Gloster (left) and his consecrators, including the Rt. Rev. Edmond Browning (behind Gloster), presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States, sport red clown noses during a ceremony at Duke Chapel to ordain Gloster as Suffragan Bishop. Gloster, who has used a clown in his ministry, has spoken on the importance of laughter and play in faith.

45 posted on 10/09/2002 7:00:14 AM PDT by sockmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
How many versions of your normative Mass are floating about these days? They seem to vary quite immensely on all levels: parish, diocese, archdiocese, country, etc. Are they all legitmate and equally pleasing to God, except for that dreadful, so consistent Indult that you hope the next Pope abolishes?

<> I don't think the 1962 Roman Missal dreadful nor do I think it impeccable. I do think the Indult will be withdrawn by the next Pope. If that happens, I think many will fall into the private judgement lairs the schismatic recruiters have dug all around their schismatic camps.

Wander too close to these nuts and one will find themselves severed from the Body of Christ and isolated in an insane abattoir of an imaginary "eternal Rome," whatever the hell that means.<>

46 posted on 10/09/2002 7:05:45 AM PDT by Catholicguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: sockmonkey
And don't get me started on the Churches that yank out the Holy Water during Lent, and replace it with kitty litter, or little cactus gardens.

Excuse me: WHAT?

Holy Water isn't supposed to be removed until Good Friday.

[groans] Lord, Jesus Christ, we your people need help.
48 posted on 10/09/2002 7:47:01 AM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey; Polycarp
I apologize - for I presumed it HAD to be a doctored photo that was done to mock members of the clergy.

Given the fact that these men chose to act so foolishly in public - while vested - I think it is actually a good thing to publicize how foolishly some clerics (Catholic or not) behave.

Polycarp, I apologize.

49 posted on 10/09/2002 8:46:27 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
How grotesque. They MOCK the Church. GRRRRRRRRRR........
50 posted on 10/09/2002 8:57:48 AM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-124 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson