The use of the term 'violation' is nearly tantamount to the outrageous statment by Father Martin Tran that Kneeling "is clearly rebellion, grave disobedience and mortal sin,"
Over the centuries, the practice of kneeling in reverance has been adopted by many churches. The cultural barriers that once separated all of us have fallen. There are westerners who practice their faith in eastern churches and v.v. Ultimately, the key word is "reverance", be it kneeling or standing. For any priest to mandate only one form, shows a total disregard for the heart and soul of the worshiper who chooses the other.
In fact, during the Epiclesis, the Maronite priest drops to both knees behind the altar, elevates his hands and calls down the Holy Spirit to accept our offerings. Is this not the ultimate form of reverence? The principal celebrant in the above picture is beginning to chant of the Words of Institution. Notice that the three priests assisting, are on their knees.
In the Maronite Catholic Church, both standing and kneeling are considered acceptable forms of reverance.
"The use of the term 'violation' is nearly tantamount to the outrageous statment by Father Martin Tran that Kneeling "is clearly rebellion, grave disobedience and mortal sin,"
But, NYer, it is most assuredly a violation of Canon XX of the 1st Ecumenical Council. How can it be anything else? Has the Latin Rite now discarded the canons of the Ecumenical Councils or only selected ones? If I recall correctly, every canon of the 1st Ecumenical Council was accepted by Rome.
By the way, nice picture of the consecration in a Maronite Church. I understand you will soon be doing away with that Vatican II facing the congregation stuff and going back to the ad orientam position as part of the "de-Romanizing" of the Maronite Church. Correct?
Whenever I see that picture with the Maronite priest with the long white beard and the bald head, I think he's a converted Shaolin monk. ;-)