Would You Correct A Friend Who Is Doing Something Wrong At Mass?

[Aloysius]

While you cite Jimmy Akin as an authority, on the same level of authority we've cited Fr. Z, EWTN, Adoremus, etc.  all of those sources specifically said there is no issue with kneeling after the Agnus Dei even when it's not the local norm.

 

As far as your pastor, I've talked to priests about it who have agreed with my interpretation, and there is every indication that Cardinal Arinze would agree with me... there are plenty of videos of him where he gets audibly perturbed by anyone trying to forbid kneeling at any part of the mass.

 

As far as your bishop... well, I'd have to see his actual published norms, so far all the diocesan websites I've checked for norms have listed them in ways that are easily interpretable according to the mens cited by the CDW.

[Lil Red]

Honestly, Pliny, your responses about these ladies make me sad. You seem to have a lot of anger against anyone who goes against the normative. and while it's admirable that you care so much about Mass and being obedient, it's very saddening that you would assign nefarious motives to these ladies when you personally know NOTHING of their motives. Your attitude towards these ladies is something I encountered a lot when I went to a different parish. Now I go somewhere else where my postures don't make others give me looks of disgust. 

[Aloysius]

another point: we have demonstrated clear doubt relating to the obligation, leaving the burden of proof to you to demonstrate any way in which the norms rise to the level of a regulation, because an immemorial or centennial custom of the people like kneeling at that point in the liturgy, even if it's contrary to or apart from the existing canon law or liturgical norms, can only be countered as a legitimate option if it is expressly reprobated (see canons 25-28).  merely having a customary norm, which was instituted as an option for bishops by the bishops at the USCCB who specifically said during their debates on the subject that they were only doing so in order to not disrupt the existing practices of standing where they had gained hold, because the local adaptations of the norms are meant to adapt to the existing customs of the people not to mandate them, does not make for an explicit reprobation.  

[Lilllabettt]

I'll just think you're rude and arrogant, and pray for you to find the humility to subordinate your personal piety for the sake of others.

 

 

the above is an example of "rash judgment."  It's one of the chief spiritual sicknesses of the world.  If you really think kneeling is wrong, that's fine. It is not fine for you to choose to think that those who do so are rude or arrogant or lack humility.

 

We can judge actions, not motives. You don't know what motivates a person to kneel. It would be wrong for me to think a person supports abortion rights because they hate babies. It would be wrong for people to think I oppose gay marriage because I hate gay people.

 

When I say judging is wrong, I am talking about the deliberate choice to judge the motive of another person's actions.  Sometimes our stream of consciousness just automatically wants to assess and comment on whatever comes into our visual field. When that happens I have found it helpful to not "correct" myself but just to interrupt my train of thought. When I realize my stream of consciousness is going in a bad direction I tell myself "merp!" and then refocus my attention on something else. With more practice it gets easier to see things without making mental comments about them.

 

Practical tip: stand in front of a mirror, look closely at what you see, but try to avoid making remarks to yourself about what you see.  See how long you can go. (( This exercise is especially helpful for turning off self-judgment in girls. ))

Edited January 26, 2014 by Lilllabettt

[NotreDame]

So now I'm a troll AND a liar?  Nice.

 

I suppose I should consider myself blessed to have such a thorough pastor.

 

Well, it was a poor choice of words on my part.  I would say that your story is causing a great degree of cognitive dissonance for me.

1.  I've never seen a diocese where standing was uniformly practiced at every parish.  I have been in dioceses where individual parishes tended to stand, but other parishes invariably knelt.  Unless there was uniformity, I wouldn't even think of holding someone to a standard that didn't in practice exist. 

 

2.  I've never ever heard instruction on the standing vs kneeling issue at a Roman Rite Church.  EVER.  Not from a priest during a sermon, not in the bulletin, nowhere.  At one of those parishes I asked the usher why they stood and he had no idea.  On this basis, I'd have to assume that most laypeople are ignorant in this regard.  Maybe your priest is the exception, but how many were at that parish for his instruction, versus being in attendance at the other 99.99% that never brought this up?

3.  The evidence is overwhelmingly against your pov that kneeling in these situations would be disobedient.  You have given us your pastor's opinion without any support.  It's also not correct to say that you have your Bishop's support on the point regarding disobedience.  You only know that he has asked people to stand, not that he has forbid kneeling (there's a big difference) and would find it disobedient.  Even then, it's not clear he has the power to forbid kneeling based on the documents linked to and cited on this thread from the Holy See. 

 

Even if I grant all the things you say,  you still don't know if these people are properly informed on the subject.  Assuming they were properly informed, you don't know if it's still disobedient to kneel. 

 

I think the energy you are putting into a response is quite disproportionate relative to what is a very minor issue that few people seem to have clarity on. 

 

So yeah, I am having trouble getting my head around all this.  That's not to say it isn't true.   Just that the issue and your reaction to it don't make sense to me.  That's all. 

Edited January 26, 2014 by NotreDame

[HisChildForever]

I don't think we could reduce what is clearly stated in the GIRM as the bishop's right, to a "local norm."

 

At any rate, I had a talk with my pastor today, and he was basically in agreement with me that those who defy the bishop regarding this posture are ignorant or rebellious, and if their consciences permit them to do this, then their consciences have been poorly formed.

 

He doesn't let them off the hook for being ignorant however, since he took great pains to teach everyone the proper postures, etc., as per the changes that came in 2010.   

 

I don't understand at all the argument that one can ignore the bishop if one thoughtfully prays about it.  Why would anyone want to do that in the first place?  And why would anyone want to assume a posture that makes them stand out and be different than the rest? 

 

Here's something I've been pondering since veiling was mentioned and I discussed that a little with my pastor.  Every woman who kneels in opposition to what our bishop says they should do, also wears a veil!  And every woman (at daily Mass) who wears a veil, also kneels at the wrong time. (With the exception of my friend who does not wear a veil).  And they are the only ones.  So they do TWO things that clearly and obviously sets them apart visually from the rest of the community.  Of course I'm not saying that it's wrong to wear a veil, though I wonder why one would want to dress outside of what is the norm, and in a way that tends to make her stand out like a sore thumb, since there are so few who wear veils.  Our pastor does not preach against it, but he does not allow veils to be worn by Eucharistic ministers, lectors, or anyone involved in the liturgy, as he feels it would be disruptive since it draws attention to their extraordinary way of dressing.  His feeling about veils is that wearing them is outside of the norm of what would be considered normal dress, as he also says about wearing something that is obviously too casual, like a bathing suit, or something too formal, such as a tuxedo.  But once again, he doesn't preach against it.

 

So why wouldn't these women be concerned about sticking out like sore thumbs in TWO respects?  What is wrong with blending in with the rest, especially in the area of the liturgy where the bishop has spoken? 

 

There are about seven ladies who attend daily Mass who wear veils and who kneel instead of stand as required by the bishop.  And most of them I know fairly well.  I don't say they're bad people, but I do know that some of them are extremely strong-willed and pushy about their projects, and some of them preach dogmatically regarding the special things they do during the Mass, and regarding how to receive Communion.  In other words, I have seen a very prideful side to some of these women, so in my mind it follows that they would allow their pride to get the better of them and substitute their personal preference for that which is required by legitimate authority.  I think these ladies (some of them, not all because I think a couple of them are followers) could be making an idol out of the things that they do that are different and better than what others do.

 

I told my pastor that in a way I feel as though they are insulting the rest of us who are not making that special posture, as if we are somehow not being as reverent by standing.  He said he understood that and that he gets a little irritated by them as well, but it's a battle that is not worth fighting, especially since there are so few of them.  He cautioned me not to make this a cause or to correct them, not that it isn't my right, but for my own sake, that it would not go well for me.  Though I charitably have listened to their preaching about veils, about how to receive Communion, and the bad things about our (previous) bishop,  just giving an article about postures to one of the veiled kneelers who I know very well caused her to get all huffy with me. She even told me that Father gave her permission to kneel, and he told me today he never has given such permission, since it's not his authority to do so.  At best he would have said that he couldn't stop her from doing her own thing.

 

I would HAPPILY have a discussion with them about what they think is right, or what they think I should change, even the lady who told me that it's a sacrilege that I receive Communion in the hand.  I didn't get huffy because I'm secure in what I do and know I'm in line with the Church teachings.  I think I have to worry about their reactions because they do not have that kind of humility and they have no way to support their positions.  

 

Regarding this "debate."  I didn't start it to be a debate about this issue, since I assumed we were all on the same page regarding obedience to the bishop. I'm frankly shocked that we are not.  I know that some think some good arguments have been presented and the fellow who insinuated that I was "trolling" seems to think I should be overwhelmed by the "evidence" but I am not.  I have no axe to grind here regarding that issue, and I looked at it from the perspective as whether I could find something convincing that would permit me to do what I prefer to do, which is to kneel at that point, but I have not seen anything conclusive.

 

The authorities that I have on my side are the Bishop, Jimmy Aiken, my pastor, and my own common sense.  Those authorities trump the authorities here "FOR ME."  I realize that that in no way proves a point to anyone else, though I don't know why they wouldn't be respected (except for the last one), and at this point I really don't care to and don't have the time to do any more research.  If some day I come up with something better as far as a debate is concerned I will post it.

 

I'm convinced these ladies are in the wrong.  I'm a little sad that my friend has joined them, though I give her the benefit of the doubt that she doesn't know any better.  But I'm not going to approach her or anyone else about what they do.  I'm only going to discuss it if they bring up the subject to me or if such a conversation would occur in a natural way.

 

I don't mean to be too harsh regarding these ladies as I still love them.  Father said if I am tempted to feel negatively towards them that I should think instead about the ways (and there are many) that I too have been prideful or disobedient to what I know is right, and focus on my own faults, and I think that's very good advice.

 

So I'm done with this thread now, unless someone has a specific comment or question for me.  I have appreciated the opportunity to vent here, which might have helped keep me out of trouble in my "real" life in our church.

 

You need to stop this preoccupation with what other people are doing at Mass. I mean really, you make it sound as if they're yodeling during the consecration or running down the aisles naked. 

[Pliny]

While you cite Jimmy Akin as an authority, on the same level of authority we've cited Fr. Z, EWTN, Adoremus, etc.  all of those sources specifically said there is no issue with kneeling after the Agnus Dei even when it's not the local norm.

 

 

I missed the one from Fr. Z.  Could you save me the trouble of looking for it and post it again or link to it?

[NotreDame]

Yep. Read everything carefully. But if you had "done the research" as you said, surely you would've found these, they're among the top results on a Google search. 

 

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/kneeling_after_the_lamb_of_god.htm

 

"For those who wish to kneel, where the norm is standing, the right to do so has been secured by the Holy See. Please see Kneeling in the Mass." (http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/kneeling.htm)

 

And also:

 

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/02/quaeritur-am-i-forbidden-to-kneel-after-the-agnus-dei

 

There are several others, but I think these will suffice. 

 

Fr Z's is the last link.

[Pliny]

OK, I'll concede that Fr. Z says "go for it," but try to hide somewhere where you won't be seen (LOL).

But he didn't provide anything new in the way of support for that position.

 

Here's something interesting about receiving Communion while kneeling:

 

The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm. - See more at: http://www.adoremus.org/1002AmAdaptations.html#sthash.2ShXJsyN.dpuf

 

 

It's true that nobody can be denied Communion for kneeling, but what's this business about providing catechesis to the kneelers?  What this says to me is that there are some who are ignorant and some who just want to have their own way, but nevertheless we will not deny Communion to the ignorant and to the spoiled brats.  We want to keep them in the flock. But let's have a discussion with them privately and try to convince them to receive according to the norm and in a way that doesn't put on a show or disrupt the Communion line.

 

I've been thinking about that term "legalistic."  It seems to me that those who go against what their bishop says, what 99% of their brothers and sisters are doing, and just plain good manners are the ones who are being "legalistic":  "HEY!  Look at the fine print here.  I CAN kneel and you can't make me me stand!"

Edited January 27, 2014 by Pliny

[Pliny]

You need to stop this preoccupation with what other people are doing at Mass. I mean really, you make it sound as if they're yodeling during the consecration or running down the aisles naked. 

 

 

A discussion in a thread is not a "preoccupation."  A principle is being discussed here.  Do you have anything to add besides attempting to correct my behavior?

[Aloysius]

Understandably it was buried in the many posts, but I did make a point about that already: that little snippet about providing catechesis was dropped in 2010, the wording was changed to make it more clear that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with kneeling.  It now states:

 

“The norm established for the Dioceses of the United States of America is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling.” 

 

The part about taking them aside to explain to them they were wrong was explicitly and purposefully taken out.

 

people who are kneeling are not pointing to the fine print, I am merely addressing the matter from the fine print to explain why people's postures are not so rigidly legislated, that when they are participating in immemorial customs to worship their Lord, there is no intention from the liturgical rubrics or norms to stomp that out.  again, it is your burden to show that it has been expressly reprobated... but I am of course dealing with the intricacies of the law.  the more simple non-legalistic answer is again, what Cardinal Arinze said, if people want to kneel then "what is wrong with that? ...why don't you kneel?  why don't you crawl?"  the rubrics do not prohibit such acts and customs of piety.

[HisChildForever]

A discussion in a thread is not a "preoccupation."  A principle is being discussed here.  Do you have anything to add besides attempting to correct my behavior?

 

I'm not talking about this thread. I'm talking about how distressed you are over someone else's preferred posture at Mass. It's already been explained that they're free to kneel if they wish. Honestly, you can damage your spiritual life if you allow yourself to fret over others in this way.

[Pliny]

I'm not talking about this thread. I'm talking about how distressed you are over someone else's preferred posture at Mass. It's already been explained that they're free to kneel if they wish. Honestly, you can damage your spiritual life if you allow yourself to fret over others in this way.

 

I concede that that's the case regarding receiving Holy Communion, and that I was using an outdated source--at least that's how it appears at this time.  I was going to draw a parallel to that thinking and apply it to postures at other times.  I am curious, though why it was there until 2010, how long it was there, if it was invalid during the time is was there, and if there is any explanation why it was removed.

 

But there is nothing definitive clearly stated regarding at the Lamb of God.

 

You know, this is just a discussion on a message board.  I am hardly "fretting" or damaging my spiritual life.  In fact this discussion led me to having a discussion with my pastor but that was only a part of the discussion and I got some good spiritual direction.  So I can say that my spiritual life has improved a little.

[Ice_nine]

11 pages lol

[PhuturePriest]

Veiling is a whole separate issue...I'm sorry I brought it up. We could go another 50 pages on that alone. LOL. You can do a search for our veiling threads...all of which have great responses for and against veiling. 

 

We should go to Mass together, sometime. You can wear your veil, I'll wear my kilt, and we'll watch with satisfaction as all hell breaks loose.

Edited January 27, 2014 by FuturePriest387