Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:13 AM By Russell
The bishop is simply not being honest when he makes the claim that genuflecting and kneeling “…is not proper according to the liturgical norms.” That or he is ignorant of the truth. This situation has been beaten to death and is well documented within the Church by the Holy See. Cathechists in my Diocese of Monterey knowingly lie and say that the Church has prohibited receiving communion while kneeling. That’s just not true and they wonder why people dismiss them. I do agree that some people demand to knee in situations where they shouldn’t in terms of safety and disruption to the Mass. Yes, I know it’s their right but in some cases they seem to be putting on a show more than anything else…
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:50 AM By gretchen
If this is true, then why will the Holy Father only distribute to those who kneel and receive on the tongue. American Catholicism led by the usccb is a mess as far as I’m concerned.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:10 AM By Gabe
It is telling, I think, that although he appeals to the Eastern Rites, and reaches far back into history all the way to around the year 400 AD, and finds some justification from St Cyril, there is not one word about the norms for most of the history of the Latin Rite. It is almost as if the East and St Cyril are important but the rest of our Liturgical history is not, and is to be totally ignored? As if it never existed? Is it because it is an embarrassment? And better forgotten? Like the era of slavery and nazism? It is curious that an otherwise comprehensive and historical document should totally ignore most of the history of its purported subject. Especially disappointing considering the otherwise fine reputation of this particular bishop in traditional circles. Also a pity because although the self proclaimed purpose of the document is to clear up confusion, it will now be likely that some will appear at the approved Latin Masses in his diocese of Oakland, and appear before the priest for Holy Communion, standing and with their arms outstretched, a gesture certainly foreign, confusing, and certainly not proper according to the liturgical norms of that particular rite. In some cases the would be communicants may even tend to adamance on this point because of their desire to be obedient to their bishop! Talk about confusion!
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:09 AM By Ted
1. This instruction is directly opposite of the pope’s. 2. In the Eastern rites, whenever the Roman rite kneels in the liturgy, they stand, as do the Orthodox churches. It’s a matter of reverence and custom, but standing for communion is another invented custom from the 1970’s, allowed by disobedient bishops. If anyone can mandate kneeling and receiving on the tongue, it will have to be the Holy father, and many bishops will persist in disobedience even then. They want control of their local Church, and will fight for it – most of them in the USA, that is.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:23 AM By Jim
Just for the record, Bishop Cordileone is one of the most orthodox Bishops you will ever meet. I would think a true Christian attitude would be to pause and think for a bit before suggesting that he is “not being honest” or is contributing to the “mess” of American Catholicism. Bishop Codileone is a great gift of God to the Church.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:43 AM By OSCAR
When the Bishop speaks about liturgical ‘norms’, he is speaking only about the desires of the USCCB who try to create norms. In addition GIRM (General Instruction fo the Roman Missal) printed on the USCCB web site, clearly states that Communion may be recieved while kneeling if it is the desire of the Communicant. So the Bishop is not following GIRM to the letter. He is correct that if one wants to receive Communion while standing, he is to bow first. However, Jesus is not just someone of “importance” like a high politician; He is our God. If we truly believe that we are receiving God we should kneel before Him – the most High. The Bishop needs to discuss the ABUSES / VIOLATIONS by the Laity of holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer with arms up in the air like Protestant tradition, and giving the sign of Peace to others that are not nearest to them.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:02 AM By JLS
He forgot about the fact that standing while receiving is often awkward and difficult for some priests to place the Host on the tongues of some people … eg short priest and tall communicant.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:15 AM By Joe
This sounds very unusual coming from His Excellency Bishop Cordileone. Is it possible someone else posted this on the Diocese website?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:17 AM By Mary
Mass is not the place for individual expressions of piety. Our posture at Mass should be one of unity and, in obedience, we as laity should follow the instructions given to us. The notion that someone can decide for themselves what is proper posture speaks of pride and not humility. There is a meaning behind everything that occurs at Mass.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:25 AM By BETH
Thanks OSCAR for your post. ” GENERAL INSTRUCTION OF THE ROMAN MISSAL, Including Adaptations for the Dioceses of the United States of America ” – note the US being singled out within the quotes; can also be found on the Vatican web site. When is the USCCB going to stop asking for changes? ? ? The Vatican has to start telling them “NO”. I agree with the LAITY abuses following Protestant tradition, and the DISRUPTION of giving the sign of the Peace to those not nearest.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:31 AM By Sandra
Bishop Cordileone is one of our most orthodox Bishops and because he is so, I pause to listen to this instruction from him, even though I hesitate and want to adhere to scripture that says, “all knees will bend before the Lord” (from memory). I genuflect in front of the Lord, saying “my Lord and my God” and then the Eucharist of the tongue. I am not doing it for “show”. It is the real presence of the Lord and what I’d really like to do is crawl to Him and/or postrate myself before Him.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:35 AM By Gabriel Espinosa
“Take care to consume any particles which may remain in your hand and return to your place in the pew (or approach the Communion station for the Blood of Christ, as the case may be). Note: if one of your hands is impeded such that you cannot receive Communion in this way, you should receive on the tongue.” He’s got to be kidding right? I assist Father at Mass when there is no altar boy and I have NEVER EVER seen anyone actually check their hands for particles.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:35 AM By JLS
Correct, Mary, and one of the outcomes of the novus ordo liturgy has been confusion.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:39 AM By Anita
Why were the communion rails taken out of churches? It sure was not awkward to kneel and receive communion then. All this new order nonsense is done to create less solemnity. By the way we aren’t to copy Jesus when we receive communion, but to adore him. Since when is kneeling for the most important part of our worship inappropriate?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:48 AM By Roberto
Bishop Cordileone is an orthodox, conservative and holy man. By this instruction, he is exercising his duty as a Bishop to lead and instruct the faithful.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:51 AM By Cup?
Isn’t it a chalice?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:52 AM By Traditional Angelo
These norms were issued by the USCCB several years ago. The Bishops of the US directly violated the Norms issued by the Second Vatican Council. According to the Council, Kneeling is the rule, while standing is only an exception in certain circumstances. How could the Bishops mistreat Traditionalists for the claim they don’t accept Vatican ll when the Bishops have also rejected the direct teachings of V2 themselves. Of course it makes no sense! Its just a case of ignoring and misinterpreting V2 as usual for 45 years. And then the Bishops go about wondering why the frustration of Traditionalists with the way they have perfectly led the Church.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:58 AM By Joe
I stand corrected. I just did a web search and found this text in a November 2011 bulletin for the Cathedral.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 7:04 AM By FHKJ
Traditionalists? I thought we are Catholics!
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 7:35 AM By Robert Lockwood
Correct Anita, like the minor word changes that were recentally made causing confusion – and standing or kneeling after the Agnus Dei where the Holy Sacrament is exposed to the congregration. Anytime the Sacramenrt is exposed we kneeled in respect – time gone by – in Oakland we stand, In SF, Sacramento, and SantaRosa we kneel. The older I get I realize the Church is infiltrated with those bent on destroying our faith as nurturing it. Distrtibuting the Holy Eucharist in two different ways confuses everyone. If you receive on the tounge as I do, the distriblutor wants to put the host on your tounge at the same time as he says “Body of Christ” making it near impossible to reply Amen. It almost feels like the distriblutor is making a point – if you are going to make me put it on your tounge you are going to pay for it.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 7:36 AM By ANNE
Those who do not support Vatican II are not traditionalists, but heretics or schismatics. Traditionalists support ALL the duly called Councils of the Church – that is Tradition. On the other hand, none of us should support any ABUSES of the Councils. The best way to know the difference is not to take anyone’s word for it, but read the Documents of Vatican II ourselves. Yes, there have been very visable abuses of Vatican II.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 7:37 AM By Dante
WOW…for a blog that seems to attract mostly traditional Catholics I am quite saddened and surprised at the overwhelming prideful, arrogant and seemingly disobedient attitude towards a bishop of the Church who is speaking and teaching well within his authority and apostolic office. How very sad.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 7:42 AM By Victor Claveau
The traditional posture for receiving Holy Communion in North America is kneeling. This is why churches had altar rails and the faithful received the Eucharistic species while kneeling. Since the introduction of the Novus Ordo, by Pope Paul VI, the normative posture for receiving Holy Communion in the U.S. is standing, in accordance with GIRM 160. However, standing is not a mandatory posture. The GIRM does not say that Holy Communion must be received while standing, if so, it would be considered as being required by liturgical law. The word “normative”, when used in this context is the minimum required or the usual practice. The faithful have the option of kneeling or standing and of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue or in the hand.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:05 AM By Gramps
Bishop Cordileone is certainly conservative, he appears to be orthodox in matters of dogma, and he may well be a holy priest. None of these mean that he can’t make a mistake. He has done so in this matter. So also did John Paul in permitting girls to serve at the altar. There remain rampant liturgical abuses in the Diocese of Oakland that need to be eliminated. The good bishop would be well advised to focus on those first.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:12 AM By Traditional Angelo
FHKJ, We are all Catholics. But it cannot be denied that questions loom. There is much division in the Church that has lasted 45 years. So! The necessity to use labels. I will answer only for myself. I am a Traditionalist in line with the Traditionalism of Bl. John XXlll, Pope Paul Vl, Bl. John Paul ll, Pope Bendict XVl and Saints like St. Padre Pio, St. Jose Maria Escriva and numerous powerful voices in the Church who have and are battling for the defense of Christ’s Catholic Church. I don’t fully understand Vatican Council ll, my hope is to understand and heed its call for the true Reform. That is the Reform of our lives in union with God. Not the errouneous misinterpretaions of the council that have only served to confuse us, and cause great damage to the Church.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:22 AM By Mbuku Kanyau
This to me sounds like the norm in a non traditional parish. While the Bishop teaches in Authority, I would venture to say that the new Form of the Roman rite is clearly its own rite separate from the Traditional Roman Rite
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:26 AM By Joan
This is the saddest statement coming from the Am Bishops I have ever been asked to comply with. I kneel to go to Communion and recieve on the tongue after much intimidating verbal pressure not to do so by the priest who gives me Jesus in daily Mass.If the Host is God, which it is, then the time honored position before Him is, not merely to kneel, but to prostrate yourself before Him.By the way, has anyone noticed that at the Consecration, the priest no longer blesses the bread?In the Masses I attend this is omitted. Is this a valid Consecration?I ask in sincerety.Will someone answer?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:44 AM By Mary
Venerable Mary of Agreda in her Vision of the Last Supper says this is what happened after that first consecration: The Virgin Mother, in her retreat, prostrated Herself on the ground and adored her Son in the Blessed Sacrament with incomparable reverence. Then also the angels of her guard, all the angels of heaven, and among them likewise the souls of Enoch and Elias, in their own name and in the name of the holy Patriarchs and Prophets of the old law, fell down in adoration of their Lord in the holy Sacrament.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:50 AM By Life Lady
It has been my experience that if I have a problem with a priest in the manner that I choose to receive Holy Communion, I move on to another priest/parish, until I find a place where I can receive Holy Communion as I am accostumed to, kneeling and on the tongue. (I make certain that I am the last person in line to avoid any mishaps) With the establishment of a FSSP personal parish in my town, I can now attend Mass in the manner to which I can most fully appreciate and worship Jesus, kneeling, listening to the latin while following in a daily missal, and receive Holy Communion kneeling on the tongue. My suggestion is that if you want to be able to do the same, begin a prayer group who earnestly wants those conditions for themselves, and then approach your bishops for such a parish in your area. We prayed for 20 years and got ours, but it was not so easy as is suggest. However, with what is currently going on in the world, your prayers and sacrifices could get it sooner than you think. I also suggest that any prayers and sacrifices that we do for our bishops could only bring them good, and help the faithful laity. Lastly, I have a hard time believing that bishop Cordeleone himself issued these directives. He is a loving and compassionate man, and these directives do not resemble his speech in any way.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:58 AM By Larry
If kneeling to receive is improper, then I don’t understand why Pope Benedict prefers to give Communion at St. Peter’s to kneeling recipients. There’s a disconnect here. What am I missing?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:09 AM By BETH
TA’s post of 6:52am is correct. It is the USCCB (American Bishops) who are trying to dictate what the norms are for the USA, rather than following the Magisterium. This is what causes so much friction and disunity in the USA and the Church. We stand for the pledge of allegience to the flag. We kneel before God.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:21 AM By Patrick
This is an unfortunate proclamation from Bp. Cordileone. I understand the desire for a common practice and liturgical norm. I don’t understand the “proper posture” language. Kneeling has been the posture of the faithful for reception of holy communion for centuries. If he wants uniformity, just say that the faithful in the diocese of Oakland are to receive standing. At least it would be an honest exercise of his authority as bishop. This “proper posture” nonsense is right out of some liturgist’s playbook.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:21 AM By Bud
The availability of the Communion Rail and in some cases complete with a linen cover trained us to kneel for many years. It doesn’t make sense now to kneel with the priest often in a different position and stationary rather than coming to us. Grow up people, quit getting in the way of others unless a kneeler is furnished! Again, on visiting a Ukrainian Orthodox Church for Vespers, there weren’t any pews except along the walls for frailer people . Kneelers are never present! Besides, my knees wont take it anymore.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:24 AM By ken in San Antonio
You folks are blessed with a wonderful Ordinary. Your grumbling in this matter smacks of pride and shows a profound lack of respect and humility. Get over it!
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:30 AM By Catherine
Larry, Here is another teachable moment. Yes, there is a disconnect. You ask what you are missing? You seem to missing compassion for others who also see the disconnect.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:00 AM By jp
Good point Catherine. Larry it is simple. Say a parishioner from Oakland visits Rome, seat of Christ’s Church, and goes to Mass with the Holy Father. Do they kneel to receive (as the Holy Father instructs?), or do they stand (as their own Bishop instructs)? That disconnect is a very big problem indeed. How are we to reconcile it?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:03 AM By jon
There is definitely no disconnect. The Bishop is within his right to mandate what is the liturgical norm in his diocese, without contradicting the liturgical documents of the Church, and in this case there is definitely no contradiction.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:07 AM By Abeca Christian
How sad this is. To say that the proper way to receive communion is by standing and all along, our parish is kneeling. Why does that one comment seem like an activist one, one that wants to abolish the church’s traditional form. It is disrespectful to have made such a comment. The more I get to know my faith and it’s diverse ways, the more I have compassion for our elders who are used to the traditional ways, it’s no wonder my papa had a hard time attending a NO mass. He probably felt the whip come out and was made to conform or be in sin, so it probably seemed that way to many, who knows. I never understood his believes and stand on that but in the past few years, my eye’s have been opened. It’s no wonder many Catholics are depressed! Instead of being concerned with helping Catholics develop more love for our Lord, to fear the Lord, to personally know him, people are more concerned on what is more proper, forget the Traditional Element of the faith, which comes across that way, lets punish them for not accepting the new way, slam the CCC on them, punish them for holding on to the old ways, strip them of their traditions and bring forth more confusion and division! Water down the message from the early church doctors is what many are doing today. I am saddened, I was hoping we would unite all Catholics and respect all what many different rites have to offer. Saint Thomas Aquinas preached about using our logic and reason, why are some in our church destroying that with stating what is proper and disrespecting what has always been practiced by those who hold to tradition. I have no issue with the NO but to make a strong statement with the verbiage like “the proper way”. I was always told that the proper way was to receive our Lord kneeling! Why now do we read different??
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:10 AM By Cilla
And this is why I only attend Tridentine Masses.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:13 AM By Fred
Here is a post from Catholic Answers: Without offering any comments on the matter, here is what the Holy See has to say: Prot. n. 47/03/L Rome, February 26, 2003 This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has received your letter dated December 1, 2002, related to the application of the norms approved by the Conference of Bishops of the United States of America, with the subsequent recognitio of this Congregation, as regards the question of the posture for receiving Holy Communion. As the authority by virtue of whose recognitio the norm in question has attained the force of law, this Dicastery is competent to specify the manner in which the norm is to be understood for the sake of a proper application. Having received more than a few letters regarding this matter from different locations in the United States of America, the Congregation wishes to ensure that its position on the matter is clear. To this end, it is perhaps useful to respond to your inquiry by repeating the content of a letter that the Congregation recently addressed to a Bishop in the United States of America from whose Diocese a number of pertinent letters had been received. The letter states: “…while this Congregation gave the recognitio to the norm desired by the Bishops’ Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion”. This Dicastery hopes that the citation given here will provide an adequate answer to your letter. At the same time, please be assured that the Congregation remains ready to be of assistance if you should need to contact it again. With every prayerful good wish, I am Sincerely yours in Christ, [signed] Mons. Mario Marini Undersecretary
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:16 AM By Abeca Christian
Also folks the problem is not the NO mass, it is some of the leaders/people of it. What went wrong? Human error. My fiend is visiting today and gave me more input from her views. She said that if those from the Traditional element of the faith weren’t so rigid perhaps the NO wouldn’t have been so open to changes. I also told her that we make those from the traditional element come across as rigid but if you look at some of the NO mass, they are more rigid and closed minded to Tradition and tend to be more disrespectful to those who hold to tradition. So it goes both ways. I pray for this madness to stop, it is only bringing forth division and more confusion, this is not of God!
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:48 AM By Larry
Now, how is that the case, Catherine?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:51 AM By brian
In my Ukrainian Greek Rite parish in Ukraine, everyone kneels for communion and for the anaphora, gospel, creed, our father and the final blessing. even this standing thing isnt even uniform in the greek church.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:51 AM By Mbuku Kanyau
This statement is most likely not from Bishop Cordileone. One of his communications people probably put it out in his name. Believe you me, He is not like this.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:04 AM By brian
theres no pews or kneelers in greek churches, not because they dont kneel but because they dont sit and kneel directly on the ground. it was the same in the latin tradition before the late introduction of kneelers
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:52 AM By Clinton
Here’s a point to consider: When the magi came to see the newborn Christ, what did they do? “And entering into the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they adored him” Matt. 2:11 Shouldn’t we fall down on our knees in the presence of Our Lord in the consecrated Host? Bowing is showing respect. Genuflecting is showing adoration to our God.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:02 PM By Mike
The line “in our culture….” is incredibly patronizing. We do not have a single culture. We are a nation of immigrants. If the argument for standing is based on culture, why not respect the culture of those who feel it is more acceptable to kneel?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:04 PM By Catherine
Three cheers for Fred! Three cheers for Clinton and a nice round of applause for Larry who does mean well.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:12 PM By maureen
Beautifully said Clinton! Since the indult of receiving in the hand many souls have been lost. The Holy Fater gives Communion to those only on the tongue while kneeling. Blessed Pope John Paul ll was the same. In July, the prefect of the congregation for the divine worship,and dicipline of the sacraments spoke. Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera recommended that Catholics receive Communion on the tongue while kneeling. So, why would the Bishops keep this going?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:36 PM By John Feeney
Is Bishop Cordileone saying that all of those Catholics who knelt for Communion for over one thousand years were wrong?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:06 PM By Barbara
The other people who speculate here that Bishop Cordileone was not the direct author of this handout may be right. If he was the author, he is speaking purely of the N.O. Mass, not the TLM, in which different rubrics apply. I know, because twice I have personally received Communion from Bishop Corileone HIMSELF on the tongue, kneeling at the altar rail, as part of a Tridentine Mass of which he HIMSELF was the Celebrant. A third time I was present as he distributed Communion in this manner to others. He loves the Latin Mass. He’s on our side.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:59 PM By LMM
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:06 PM By Abeca Christian
How is this article helpful? I think that it only made things worst. Those from the Traditional Element will continue to remove themselves from the NO and those of the NO element will be applauding, in your face mode! Vanity and Pride will continue to be prominent and most obvious.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:25 PM By k
Fred, I ‘m so glad that you posted that. I hope someone will bring it to Bishop Cordileone’s attention. I attended a parish once where the priest said to the congregation. ” I cannot tell you not to kneel in the communion line. You are permitted to do that. But I ask you not to, because someone is going to get hurt tripping over you. But like I said, I cannot tell you not to kneel.”
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:42 PM By JLS
Maybe the bishops are beginning to write off the novus order groupies, a stage of the Church becoming smaller and holier. In other words let those with faith in bobbles and bangles go whichever way the winds carry them into obscurity. The faithful shall always seek the true path.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:52 PM By jon
I’m sorry Fred, but according to Canon Law, the head liturgist in his diocese is the ordinary, that is the bishop, not the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, as helpful as the Congregation’s words may be. The bishop is the final authority in his diocese in matters liturgical.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 2:57 PM By bev
Robert Lockwood 7:35a: Your Eucharistic Minister is omitting a step when distributing the Host. He/she should hold up the Host and say “The Body of Christ”, wait for you to say “Amen”, and THEN place it on your tongue. I would mention this to whoever is in charge of Eucharistic Ministers at your parish/or your pastor.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:06 PM By dmw
The GIRM 2011 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” (no. 160; cf. Congregation for Divine Worship, Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum 91.)
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:27 PM By Annasher
Interesting how he quotes Canon Law on preparation for Holy Communion, then takes from the US GIRM for posture of receiving and borrows from Eastern Rites, then back to the western Rite for taking the chalice in your own hands. Quite the hodge- podge mix
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:41 PM By CB
Doesn’t anyone remember Bishop Brown refusing communion to someone who was kneeling 5-6 years ago?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:44 PM By Traditional Angelo
From the Second Vatican Council we have something that goes like this; Coummunion may be given to communicants while standing, in some certain circumstances. Such as when there is such a large number of communicants that it would unnecessarily prolong the Mass. When standing the communicant must make an exterior act of reverence (Piety if you wish) of the communicants choosing before receiving. When kneeling for communion no other act of reverence is necessary as kneeling is an act of reverence in itself. Now I ask, who was it that said, in the church there is no room for personal Piety? And who was it that said that what the USCCB says does not contradict Vatican Council ll? I agree with what one person stated, those who do not accept V2 are either heretics or schismatics, that means both the leftist extremists and the extreme to the right! Why are some tired of hearing our complaining? Because the 60’s and 70’s are over and there is no more shut up and obey attitudes that can stop us. Somone said “get over it”, I say get used to it! We have been accused of pride and arrogance, this is ludicrous. Since when does love of God and his Church constitute pride and arrogance!?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:40 PM By Michael
Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing. –The good bishop fails to mention this. From USCCB website
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:49 PM By Kristin
I tell my children to kneel by their bedside to say their prayers at night- but to stand up when they are receiving their God?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:07 PM By Anne T.
Although I receive on the tongue almost always, I stand in the Holy Communion line of those churches that do so as to avoid someone tripping over me as almost happened to a friend of mine, and I kneel at the Extraordinary Masses (approved Traditional Latin Masses) and other churches that have altar rails as is their custom. Now how hard is that to do? Common sense! Common sense! We need to use common sense. It is not about us and our will but about the Lord. As St. Ambrose said, “When in Rome do as the Romans do”. He was taling about Roman Christians not the immorality of some pagan Romans.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:09 PM By David Werling
Who cares? Just go somewhere where it is proper to kneel while receiving Holy Communion… like the Traditional Latin Mass!
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 6:29 PM By Traditional Angelo
Jon, What Fred posted he did without comment. It speaks for itself. Thats why Fred found no need to comment. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is not an empty gong. It is authorative, meant to keep Bishops in line with the Church. If it were as you say, then the said Congregation which is part of the Holy Father’s Magisterium would have no authority and each Bishop would be his own Pope able to devise his own liturgy. Why does one think that one could receive communion kneeling and no Bishop or Priest could stop them? Because the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has spoken, and they cannot be disobeyed. All Bishops are subject to the said Congregation.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:06 PM By Linda Maria
It is so easy, to simply place a kneeler in one area, for those who wish to kneel, when receiving Holy Communion! So simple! Why not do this?
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:37 PM By Janek
Standing? I can’t believe he is saying this. I was under the impression he was of the Traditional mold, after all he says the TLM very often I’am truly confused by his statement.
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:41 PM By Janek
Spot on Clinton. Bravo!!!!
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:51 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
When THEY succeeded in changing the norm from genuflecting to bowing during the Credo, the missaletes all gave the instructions to BOW! Look around you,now and notice how few, even the priests, actually bow! I was told by a priest who was close to Pope John Paul II, that he never approved of altar girls, THEY did it when he was flat on his back in the hospiital fully knowing that he was not one to make waves by reprimanding THEM for it! I asked this priest if that reluctance was not in fact a sin of ommission, and he replied in the affirmative. If it is indeed true that Bishop Cordileone did not write that letter, he should immediately punish those who did, and make it clear to the faithful that he has done so; otherwise, he too will have committed a sin of ommission. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:06 PM By charlio
The enemy of souls can imitate a humble person, but never an obedient one. – St. Faustina
Posted Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:18 PM By Abeca Christian
I remember at one of our local NO parish that we attended Mass, the priest denied me communion by mouth, he insisted I receive by hand. So without making a scene I had no choice but to accept what he was forcing on me. I never returned to that parish. Instead of being in prayer, I felt upset and asked Jesus to help me offer it up and move on. I did pray for that priest. God have mercy on us all.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 12:46 AM By Albert Cooper
This statement represents an all things to all people response.Pre Vactican Two Communion received always os the tongue,and Kneeling,the most reverent manner to receive our Blessed Lord,confirming the real presence in no uncertain way,but nowadays the Blessed Sacrament is often abused,people herding to Holy Communion,many believing that the penitential rite of the Holy Mass takes away Mortal Sin,noise,chattering,and a general air of irreverence.This Bishop seems a member of the clergy in general who sold the faith to Modernism
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:35 AM By Alfie
I fully support the bishop for the sound teaching . What is said may not sound right to our ears but he is doing it as a Good Shepherd. Keep it up your Grace.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:36 AM By JMJ
As when I was doing my devotions last night, I remembered what the Bishop said about standing when someone of importance comes into the room. I was taught to stand when anyone older than myself came into the room. NOW, the Bishop says to stand to receive Jesus as, of course, He is Importance Himself, BUT, please Bishop, when you or any Priest lift up that piece of bread/wafer & say those beautiful words: This is my Body, he/they should after they put Jesus down onto the Paten, should look out at the audience & demand everyone to stand, because it is only respect & proper, right, WRONG! In the presence of Jesus, we should be kneeling, which is why the Lord’s Prayer & the sign of peace should be BEFORE the Consecration, and we should be remaining kneeling until it is our time to receive Jesus AT THE ALTAR RAIL, WHILE KNEELING. Obey your Bishops, people & let them be the ones to answer to Jesus. +JMJ+
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 9:52 AM By MIKE
The actual letter referred to in Fred’s post of January 31, 2012 10:13 AM can be found on the internet. Giving the Bishop the benefit of the doubt, perhaps he does not know that he is in violation of the requirements of the indult (special permission). Someone from his Diocese needs to get the letter in the Bishop’s hands so he can make a correction to his statement, and also ask him to correct the laity abuses that are distruptive including but not limited to holding hands and raising arms during the Lord’s prayer and giving the sign of Peace to those who are not nearest. The letter states: QUOTE “…while this Congregation gave the recognitio to the norm desired by the Bishops’ Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion”. UNQUOTE. If enough complaints are sent to the ‘Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments’ at the Vatican – the Vatican can revoke the indult allowing standing. – So write to them also, and send the Bishop’s letter as proof.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 9:58 AM By Maryanne Leonard
Yes, we should be kneeling, but this is getting harder and harder for some of us as we get older. What would it take to get them to put back our altar rails?
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 10:20 AM By VIS
Said the Holy Father just this morning, “Jesus [in Gethsemane] threw Himself to the ground: a position for prayer which expresses obedience to the Father’s will, an abandonment of self with complete trust in Him.”
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 10:43 AM By Sandra
Maryanne, one can take up a donation specifically for the purpose of putting back altar rails in one’s own parish, so the money can’t be used for anything else. I know what you mean about – as we get older. Without anything to hold on to, I can’t kneel due to arthritis in both knees. Once kneeling I would not be able to get up by myself again.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 11:50 AM By Brian S
Church renovations matter because of impacts like these. When an altar rail and kneeler is not provided, standing essentially becomes necessary, as others, including the Bishop point out. As for the Pope, he insists on communion on the tongue at least in part to prevent predictable desecrations from people saving the consecrated Host as a souvenier.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 12:16 PM By Catherine
Maryanne Leonard, Excellent question! Rome has stated that we are “free to kneel in good conscience”. Rome has spoken! Now for your question about altar rails. The very split second that it was learned that all of the collections baskets were zero, altar rails would miraculously appear overnight! Maryanne, since I know that your prayers are very powerful, when those rails do go back up, I have some wonderful pink gardening knee pads that I would be more than happy to send to you. Can you even begin to imagine the reaction of Muslims if they were told that they could no longer kneel?
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 5:42 PM By Abeca Christian
Brian S it’s fine if a parish permits standing but let the faithful who want to kneel do so. Don’t state that the “proper way” is standing, which is incorrect, not what the church has taught! To make such statement can ultimately bring more division and cause pain and hurt to those who have it in their heart to revere our Lord by knee.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 6:27 PM By OSCAR
jon, you are wrong. Bishops must adhere to the CCC, Canon Law, and GIRM – for the liturgy, and the 1962 Missal for the EF Mass, otherwise there would be chaos. Bishops can make no changes. Please let me know which document you read that allows Bishops to do whatever they feel like.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 7:05 PM By Bob One
Dear Hearts, VII was two or three generations ago. This conservative, traditionalist bishop sticks to Canon Law pretty much all the time. He has a doctorate in it. The indult was given so that people can stand to receive, with the stipulation that those who wish to kneel can, it it is possible. Those who wish to receive on the tongue can do so as well. (As a extraordinary minister of communion, I can tell you that that is not something I ever want to do) Let’s keep in mind that the folks on this site represent the 0.02% of the faithful. One of the reasons we are not well heard is because so many want to go back to the old ways. That is no longer the RCatholic church. Watch the Pope when he says Mass at the Vatican. Even if it is in Latin, it is the NO, which is the ordinary format for Mass. The TLM is the extraordinary format. So, it is to be used as an exception to the norm. Many of us who are pre-VII will do everything in our power to not let the church drift back to the old ways. We must move forward with even more zeal.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:00 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Abeca, 11:18 AM, If a priest ever again orders you to take Communion in the hands, tell him “Father, my hands are not consecrated and yours are, and I have not purified my hands in preparation”! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:54 PM By Maryanne Leonard
Thank you, Catherine and Sandra. I think I am ready to start making noise about altar rails and see if we can get a groundswell of rumblings going. If we can get the support of the cane and walker set, we might start up a revolutionary group of Traditional Catholics Gone Wild and scare the powers that be into putting back our darned altar rails! Now! When priests distribute communion to people kneeling at the altar rail, there are no delays at all, and we are in a position of deep reverence that is much more spiritually satisfying to me than standing. Even kneeling while in line seems awkward to me and can cause people to be delayed and even pose a danger to others. None of this happens at the altar rail. Traditional Catholics Unite!
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 10:09 PM By jon
The statement that the Congregation is “meant to keep Bishops in line with the Church” is unsupported by Canon Law.
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 10:44 PM By Abeca Christian
OSCAR great comments you made! Mr. Fisher thank you, I love what you suggested, I will keep that in mind, I wish I would of thought of that instead of getting upset. You are surely a gentle man! God bless you!
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 11:55 PM By Maryanne Leonard
Bob One, what did you mean when you posted that “(As a extraordinary minister of communion, I can tell you that that is not something I ever want to do)” referring to receiving on the tongue?
Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:09 AM By OSCAR
jon, us lay people can do nothing. But any individual can write to the Vatican and must send documentation of the offense or abuse. All Catholics are bound by Canon Law this does NOT exclude Bishops, in fact it provides for the removal of Bishops due to resignation, transfer, removal, or privation. See Chapter II, “Loss of Ecclesiastical Office”. PRIVATION. Can. 196 §1. Privation from office, namely, a penalty for a delict, can be done only according to the norm of law. §2. Privation takes effect according to the prescripts of the canons on penal law. (Delict is an offense against the law – Code of Canon Law). Yes, all Catholics including Bishops are bound to adhere to the CCC, GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal), and Code of Canon Law. In the past 2 years one Bishop in Australia was removed from his OFFICE, and there was another. Many times ‘transfers’ also quietly allow for the correction of a Bishop when it publically/negatively affects the Faithful and makes it difficult for them to follow their Bishop.
Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 5:12 AM By Randy
When the Vatican gives special permission (an indult) to do something different than the rest of the Church, Bishops must be obedient to the special requirements. We do not owe obedience to disobedience. I stand when my favorite football team makes a touchdown, but I kneel before the Lord. As others have stated, the USCCB tried to create its own tradition by forcing everyone to stand while receiving Holy Communion, and by removing existing altar rails without permission of the Vatican or Vatican II. Someone from his Diocese needs to write to the Vatican about this abuse of the indult.
Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 5:46 AM By Abeca Christian
Mr. Fisher I also wanted to add is that I was also upset because I try to teach my children to receive by mouth as well and when the priest denied me of that, he also did that to our kids and my husband, it set back what I have tried to teach my children and it did not give them a positive message, this priest also lead our children to disobey their parents, we taught them to receive by mouth and he denied them of that and conveyed the opposite of what we have worked so hard to teach our children. They learned indirectly how easy it is to undermine parents whom were not wrong to teach them why we should receive by mouth. My eldest son felt uneasy as well, he recalls one person almost dropping our Lord, he also recalls that on Halloween season, there is usually someone of wicked intent, to receive by hand and run off with our Lord and who knows what they wanted to do with our Lord, he recalls someone stopping the person from leaving with our Lord in their hand.
Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 5:59 AM By Abeca Christian
OSCAR you are experiencing what we have always experienced here with jon, he has his own interpretation of the CCC. I like how you kindly showed him the facts. In the case of this article, OSCAR you are uniting the faithful with truth by defending the facts that receiving by knee is proper as well and should not be denied to those who seek to receive our Lord that way. Thank you for bringing unity and clarity, my papa would of felt relieved, if he was alive today, by your comments, respecting his traditional ways, the way he was raised, kneeling and receiving by mouth. From what I gather many felt hurt deeply and rejected because their personal love in Christ, included the Traditional Element and then were given the impression that they did not matter and that they had to conform with modernism. This brought division and because people are human, could explain why many stopped attending Mass and my dad was one of them. Praise God that through time, we got him to feel welcomed again in God’s house. He had good and patient priests in his life to help him overcome those hard emotions. He died in good graces. His love for Jesus grew through all his health sufferings and remained faithful by never leaving his Catholic faith.
Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 6:05 AM By Abeca Christian
Our youth are raised to receive by hand and to stand. We wonder why we have lazy youth with no backbone. I think that these new ways are also easy, make it easy with no deeper meaning. How will we teach our kids to fear the Lord, to love him more and more, if we don’t show them more than just your average thing. Mr. Fisher’s comment to me conveyed why there is beauty in receiving by mouth. Thanks Mr. Fisher. In humility we kneel as well.
Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 11:07 AM By Andy
I refer the bishop to the new edition of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, June 2011, “The Different Forms of Celebrating Mass”, Chapter IV, page 57, Paragraph 160: “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 (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, no. 91).
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 12:03 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Maryanne Leonard, Don’t kneel while standing in line! Kneel at the feet of the priest to receive Our Lord and Savior! I also love to pray “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, and Son of Mary, have mercy on me” while receiving! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 12:14 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Bishop Cordileone is undoubtedly one of the better Bishops. But he is human and can make mistakes. If he is as good a Bishop as I think he is, he will not get upset if his flock corrects him on this one. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 4:56 AM By Catherine
Bob One, Please answer Maryanne Leonard’s Feb. 01, 11:55 PM question.
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 6:27 AM By Bob One
When I have the opportunity to distribute communion, I will present it either in the hand of the communicant, or if they prefer, on the tongue. I don’t make any judgement about either ways of receiving. What I meant by my earlier comment was simply, and no more, that I personally find it a bit unsanitary. So I make an extra effort to make sure that I don’t actually touch the tongue. Its a personal thing, and not a religious thing. I would guess that when I was a extraord. minister of communion a few years ago, on a regular basis, there would be one or two people out of two hundred that wanted to receive on the tongue.
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 8:05 AM By Catherine
Bob One, Thank you for responding to Maryanne’s question. Well, you told the truth! You are the very 1st extraordinary minister of Holy Communion that I have ever heard publicly express that sentiment. Personally, I have a very strong feeling that while he was on this earth, St. Padre Pio as holy as he was, reflected more on his own unworthiness to be given such a holy privilege to be holding the body of Christ in his own hands.
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 8:46 AM By Canisius
@ Bob One, many of us who are post VII see the ruin it and your generation has caused. People, it is time to admit the schism in Church and reject the failing modernism.
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 11:18 AM By Abeca Christian
Saint Padre Pio pray for us. We’ve grown too proud in the wrong way. God help us!
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 12:25 PM By Bob One
Canisius, those of us who are pre-VII saw the ruin that the church was causing and welcomed the “open window” that has brought our people closer to Christ. We still have a long way to go, but at least it was a start.
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 12:59 PM By MacDonald
Matthew, Mark and Luke all say the folks at the Last Supper were “reclining at table” when they received the very first Eucharist. I hope no one suggests we lie down to receive Communion, next! It’s my understanding that Holy Mother Church allows communicants to choose to receive the Sacred Host on the tongue, or in their hand; to kneel, or to stand. However, it does get a bit weird when people make up their OWN customs and try to look “holier than thou” — like some woman at our parish recently who chose to STAND for the whole Eucharistic Prayer while everyone else was KNEELING. The children in church looked at her, wondering why in the world she was inventing her own rite!!!
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 3:45 PM By Maryanne Leonard
Kenneth, thank you, and yes, I know and agree. I must not have expressed myself correctly, but I do know what you mean. I have seen people almost trip over people who are kneeling and really do long for the old altar rails for many reasons, and efficiency and safety are only two of the minor reasons. Taking away our altar rails is yet another good example of why people say, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 6:16 PM By jon
I beg to differ with Kenneth Fisher. The Bishop has made NO mistake in expressing the fact and in mandating that the proper posture in his Diocese to receive Holy Communion is standing. No error at all!
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 6:54 PM By JLS
MacDonald, A. they had not anticipated the nature of the “supper”; B. the Lord was with them and they with Him, as had been the case for over three years; C. Might be good to review the Old Testament protocol for how the priests ate the sacrificial animals … standing up, reclining, what?
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 8:14 PM By JLS
Apocalypse Chp 14 ** And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice: If any man shall adore the beast and his image, and receive his character in his forehead, or in his hand;  He also shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mingled with pure wine in the cup of his wrath, and shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the sight of the holy angels, and in the sight of the Lamb.** Who today is receiving the “cup” with the wrath of God mingled with the pure wine? Would that be Catholics who advocate abortion and also receive Holy Communion?
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 8:41 PM By Joshua
This does not sound like +Cordileone at all. I have been to 5 of his Masses, received communion him each time kneeling. Indeed one Mass was a solemn Mass from the Throne with ordination of a priest in the old rite. Another was another EF Solemn Mass from the Throne. Yet another was an EF Missa Cantata for first Friday. A fourth as a low pontifical Mass in the EF, with the EF form of confirmation. And the fifth was a Latin Novus Ordo that followed a Solemn Mass in the EF said by the FSSP. The bishop himself, when the servers started arranging the altar for facing the people, stopped them and insisted on ad orientem Does he sound like a liturgical liberal to anyone?
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 10:57 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
The Vatican does not want “Extraordinary Ministers” used except under extraordinary situations where the numbers of Communicants necessitate for them. Read the Documents of the Church on the use of such! The last time I was in Rome and dining with most of the Bishops of Myanmar including the Archbishop of Myanmar, His Excellency Archbishop U Schwe. The Archbishop asked me about a related matter. When I commented that my hands are not consecrated, the Archbishop practically jumped out of his seat and shouted, that’s right. We have been friends ever since. He was also a good friend of Archbishop Lawrence Khai who I was graced to serve. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 12:39 AM By Marcum
We have a rail at our parish and everyone who is able to kneel uses it. We offer both the normative and extraordinary forms. I think the bishop is overwhelmed with the progressives in his flock and the large debt he inherited from the new cathedral (bishop Cummings vision). He is fighting the good fight but to keep the balance he is forced to make compromises. It is disappointing that he has lowered the expectations of focusing on improving the liturgy as a means to evangelize and inspire mediocre Catholics to repent and return to a more orthodox living faith. The bishop believes the majority of the modern flock are living in a spiritual poverty and it will take generations to turn it around. I understand the sentimen
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 7:12 AM By Bob One
Kenneth, I have no idea where you attend church on Sunday, but at my parish and most of the others that I attend in the area, have two to seven hundred people at many masses. That requires more than one priest giving communion. If the priest is giving the host, who offers the wine? I can’t remember the last time I went to Sunday mass in the last twenty years when we were not offered both body and blood. Any thriving parish needs extraordinary ministers at each mass. The need is not so extraordinary.
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 9:14 AM By Traditional Angelo
Jon, I am sure it would be somewhere in Canon Law. If the Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine worship is meant for no purpose as you imply. Then can you explain what its usefulness is exactly for.
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 9:30 AM By Traditional Angelo
jon, The major problem of the past decades are those who hail Vatican Council ll, but have never read the actual Documents. And they go around claiming what they say and do are the teachings of V2. The fact is, such Catholics completly reject the Council by their contradictions of what V2 actually said. This is the major complaint from Pope Benedict XVl, both as Cardinal and Pope. When will we learn to listen to the Vicar of Christ?
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 10:33 AM By Rick DeLano
I was denied communion because I presented myself kneeling, and from that day on I have had recourse to the Latin Mass, and this incredible statement from one of the best American bishops affirms that I made the right choice.
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 11:23 AM By Rev
“…not proper according to the liturgical norms.” Does this really square with the Vatican statement that “Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion.” Perhaps if we add the two together it shows that the USA liturgical norms are not proper according to universal norms!
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 12:52 PM By k
Marcum, thank you for your post. It can turn around much quicker than that. Of course, much depends on the bishops. In his statement quoted above “the greatest respect we can show is to always ensure that when we receive Holy Communion, we do so worthily.” That is one of the areas where there is very poor catechesis. Here I wish he had elaborated. As far as I know, none of the bishops have issued a list of what things would make one unworthy. I use an old examination of conscence but I wish they would teach more clearly on that. As for living in spiritual poverty-yes and no. For some it is a self-chosen poverty. The spiritual riches are abundant, but people refuse to take them. For others, it is a poverty bred of ignorance. It takes time to pray the rosary, adore the Eucharist, meditate, read the Bible. It takes time to teach those things. Those of us who want a spiritually richer environment are really disappointed in the lethargy on this. I feel that if they just created a more “user-friendly” environment and gave good example, things would change more quickly. At my parish, there are many of us who could and would do more in that regard if it was valued and encouraged.
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 1:18 PM By jon
TAngelo, the Congregation is not meant to usurp the authority of the Ordinary, the Bishop, in his own diocese. As for Vatican II, I have ample proof that many of the commenters here have not even read through a document from the Council. I know because I have had to correct them and you.
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 8:41 PM By Traditional Angelo
jon, I never said that the Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine worship was “meant to usurp the authority of the Ordinary”. That was beyond my wildest imagination. What I did say is that the said congregation has authority from the Holy Father and that all Bishops must comply with their directives. You claimed the opposite, using as “ample proof” the Code of Canon Law. That made no sense! You say you “have ample proof” that many commenters here have not read through a Council Document. You made that assertion and it is probably true. Please elaborate on the “ample proof” you speak of. I’m sure we will all be interested as to why you have belittled us.
Posted Saturday, February 04, 2012 11:13 PM By Abeca Christian
Are some sounding like Self righteous? Jon?
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 7:08 AM By JLS
jon, define authority.
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 8:56 AM By jon
My point TAngelo is very simple. There is nothing wrong in what Bishop Cordileone has said concerning the posture of standing in his Diocese. He has not contradicted any published liturgical guidelines for the Novus Ordo Mass with respect to this. He has not made any “mistake” with respect to issuing this guideline, contrary to Kenneth Fisher’s point. Furthermore by issuing this liturgical guideline, the Bishop is exercising the authority given him in Canon Law to be the main liturgist in his Diocese, an authority that belongs to him alone, not to the Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship. As for your earlier point that there are “those who hail Vatican Council ll, but have never read the actual Documents,” I maintain and further reiterate that there are those commenting here whom I have detected have not even read in full a document from the Council. Of this fact I have ample proof.
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 4:22 PM By jp
Just got back from being really “not proper.”
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 9:33 PM By JLS
The authority of a bishop is not his alone, but is God’s.
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 9:45 PM By Traditional Angelo
jon, What I am pointing out is this. Many hail V2 and all its (Imaginary misalighned) progress, but yet deliberatly contradict the Council Documents themselves. With that statement said, something does not sound right! The Council clearly spelled out the norms for the reception of Holy Communion. Why did the USCCB completely redo what the Council directed? They can’t do it! So, why did they? Much of the New Norms by the USCCB are a direct intended attack on Traditional Catholics. So much for Pastoralism! As for the Bishop being the main liturgist of his Diocese, this is what the Pope has entrusted him to do. They must maintain unity in the Church, by being in union with the Church herself. When they go changing V2 documents, allowing and even fostering liturgical abuse, remaining silent on abuses in the liturgy, sabotaging the binding Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, acting in direct contradiction to the Holy Father in matters of the liturgy. Then that is when Rome’s authority steps in and corrects the Bishops by order of Christs Vicar, his Magisterium through his Congregations and their dicastery’s. Rome has corrected many Bishops, with verbal warnings, removal, excommunications ect.. And will continue to do so. Deo Gratias! When a Bishop becomes a law unto himself, then its time for correction by Church authority that is intentionaly higher than him or them.
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 9:59 PM By JLS
Shuffle Mass, jp?
Posted Sunday, February 05, 2012 10:00 PM By Traditional Angelo
jon, “Are some sounding like self righteous? jon?”, “jon, define authority.” Questions from Abeca Christian and JLS. You have’nt answered them yet. I sure would like you to answer those questions. I myself am asking the same thing from you. You wrote in one post, “I know because I have had to correct them and you.”. Either you are a person in authority or you are acting in a haughty and arrogant manner. I hope its the former. Please answer the questions, we would greatly appreciate it.
Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 10:06 AM By jon
TAngelo, contrary to your point, Bishop Cordileone with this guideline does not pretend to become “a law unto himself” nor is it for him a “time for correction by Church authority that is intentionally higher than him.” He is within his authority and right as Ordinary of his Diocese to say that the proper posture for receiving Communion in his Diocese in the ordinary form of the Mass is standing. Your point therefore continues to be invalid.
Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 10:07 AM By jp
Kneeling Communion, JLS.
Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 2:52 PM By Traditional Angelo
jon, What I am doing is challenging the Bishops to make an account as to why they have caused so much confusion. Why they say they are all for V2 while rejecting its mandates by changing what the documents say. The Bishops of the US, It cannot be denied, for 45 years became a law unto themselves. Forcing us Catholics to do what is contrary to the mind of the Church and contrary to our informed conscience on matters of the Church, and all in a spirit of obedience on our part. They refused to obey the Pope and then expect everyone to obey them. No more! There must be questions answered and we do not want to wait any longer. If your reasoning is correct, then the Church has violated the rights of the SSPX Bishops. If you are correct then order in the Church is obsolete. And thus we can all do what we want. This problem has been going on for too long. We want some accounting, no more vagueness, specific accounting only. This is what I have been trying to say. No more mincing words.
Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 3:47 PM By JLS
Same here, jp.
Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 3:49 PM By JLS
jon never corrected me, although he may have convinced himself he has.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 4:23 AM By Paul
This Bishop from Oakland is typical of the Liberal set that have ravaged the church. The Blessed Sacrament should not be touched by the laity. It should be placed on the tongue because it is God. When the priest washes his hands during the Offetorium, it is a sign that he is preparing himself in the exterior and interior dimension, to enter into the mystical Sacrifice of Calvary. The priest becomes Persona Christi, as is one with Christ, offering himself on the Cross of Calvary… The Sacrifice of The Mass. From which He ( Priest ) brings back The Pascal Sacrifice, the Eucharist, the unbloody, risen Christ. This Sacrifice is, perpetually occurring in the Heavenly Sanctuary, ( the front of every Catholic Church. It is the purpose of every Mass, in every place and time. For these reasons, a) Catholics should KNEEL when receiving the Blessed Sacrament. They are receiving Christ Himself, God made Man, and b) Prepared Catholics receive the Host on the tongue. This is Holy, Sacramental food, obtained from the Altar of God. It should not be touched by hands and c) By placing The Blessed Sacrament on the tongue for immediate consumption, it prevents this Holy gift from God, falling into the hands of those who would defile it. This Bishop should join the Protestants.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:17 AM By JLS
When has a bishop ever explained the Eucharist in terms of the novus ordo liturgy? Do I recall this correctly, “let this work of human hands become for us the bread of life” ? How tight is the theology of this ?
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 10:59 AM By MacDonald
The text of the Traditional Latin Mass, right after the Consecration, says: “We offer to thy resplendent majesty…the holy Bread of eternal life and the Chalice of everlasting salvation.” (“Panem sanctum vitae aeternae, et Calicem salutis perpetuae.”) Using the words of Jesus, namely, “I am the Bread of life,” does not DENY the Real Presence, but is just one way the Church express its faith in that Real Presence.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:46 PM By JLS
My question was about any bishop explaining the words of consecration in the novus ordo. For example, regarding this question, there are countless Saints and doctors of the Church who have written countless books on this topic. Some people meditate on it endlessly. But so far all I’ve found with respect to the novus ordo form is a few sentences … and these leave some wiggle room in instructional interpretation as well as a kind of blase’ use of wording, like the post Vatican II — speeque style of nebulous language.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:50 PM By jon
Contrary to Paul, Bishop Cordileone, is far from one of the “liberal set that have ravaged the church.” Clearly Paul you do not know what you are talking about.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 1:53 PM By JLS
Paul may be overdoing his characterization of Bishop Cordileone but he is making an important point, the resolution of which is yet to be discovered. Did the Bishop directly make the statement or did some ghost writer? Either case needs to be examined to see what is going on and why it seems disingenuous.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 5:42 PM By jon
JLS, your point still does not prove that the theology is different, only that the Eucharistic Prayer is worded differently. As for my correcting you, that is the truth, you have been corrected by me at various articles here, including this one. I am merely stating fact.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:13 PM By JLS
jon, your style of argument begins and ends in your own head. Tell me when I have agreed with you. Otherwise I stand uncorrected by you. You must see yourself as a teacher who uses a ruler on windmills instead of students. You’ll always win that way, jon.
Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:35 PM By JLS
jon, did my post actually argue that the theology is different? I recall posing a question about a possible difference. And then today I posted twice wondering if any bishop has explained the novus ordo’s liturgical view of the Eucharist in exhaustive detail. Maybe someday, jon, you’ll transcend from swatting at every new shadow to engaging in an actual argument.
Posted Sunday, February 12, 2012 2:41 PM By jon
My earlier point about JLS’ saying that he theology in the Novus Ordo is different refers to the article from Jan. 19 entitled “Revisiting Vatican II in the OC.” It is relevant to bring it up here, as JLS more recently on this thread has just referred to the bishops’ explaining the words of the Novus Ordo Mass.
Posted Sunday, February 12, 2012 4:06 PM By JLS
jon, now that you’ve burped and cleared your throat (2/12/12 2:41pm), you may now proceed to state your case.
Posted Wednesday, February 15, 2012 10:09 PM By Angelo
Paul. What you state about the mystery of the mass is the reason why I love the mass. Pope Benedict xvl said that priests need to be retaught what the mass is and in turn teach the faithful. If only people realized the mystery of faith they would be flocking to the holy mass.