Replies

The RC's claim tradition carries weight, and in some cases trumps Scripture. In this case, "kneeling" now violates the "traditions" of the RC Church, and is therefore forbidden!

It's not forbidden. It's just not recommended.

If you want to look at "Tradition," standing was the customary posture for reception of the Eucharist for the first millenium and some.

So, kneeling was an "innovation," and standing is reverting to the ancient practice.

It's not forbidden. It's just not recommended.

No, it's more serious than that -- kneeling for Communion is ILLICIT, except under extraordinary individual circumstances as identified by the chancery of a diocese. (BTW, they made no exception for Indult Tridentine Masses! They're covered, too!)

The Bishops' Committee declared 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"

You can say that the Committee doesn't have the proper authority, but the bishops of the USCCB have delegated their authority to it, and until they show enough backbone to wrest that power back, the Committee's ruling will stand.

Not only that, but Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez of the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship agreed in principle with the Committee's ruling that kneeling should be illicit, but thought that a "clarification" should have been added not to deny the Eucharist to Catholics who did illicitly kneel.

And don't think that the modifications are going to stop here. Probably the next thing to happen will be for kneeling during the Eucharistic Prayers to be declared "illicit." The GIRM originally posited that standing should be the norm, but in 1969 and 1995 the US Bishops amended the GIRM so that in the US kneeling during the Eucharisitic Prayer would be the norm. But that debate is far from over.

All of this "standing" or "kneeling" which receiving the "Lord's Supper" is absolutely ludicrous. If we are to take Jesus' position, He was "inclined" at the table and so were His disciples when communion was taken. The "position" that a person's body takes is irrelavent. It's the condition of the person's heart that matters. He must understand what the Bread and Wine symbolizes, what each represents, and why these elements are used. The Body of Christ's broken body is represented by the "unleavened" bread, and the shed blood of Jesus is represented by the wine. The broken body of Jesus represents what Jesus' Body went through so that we could inheret by grace, through faith immortality, incorruptibility, and physical perfection, and the shed blood of Jesus represents the means to forgiveness of sin for without the shedding of blood, there can be no forgiveness of sin, and the blood of Jesus Christ was the only blood "pure" enough to cleanse us of all unrighteousness.

So talking about kneeling or standing is foolish. It's not the kneeling or the standing that causes us to remember Christ Jesus' sacrifice. We celebrate the communion (eucharist) to remember what Jesus did on our behalf. So talk about this, not about whether one should kneel or stand while remembering the sacrifice that Jesus went through on our behalf. You have just destroyed the very reason for the communion (eucharist), "Do this in remembrance of Me". --Jesus. You can't remember Jesus while arguing about kneeling or standing while receiving the elements of communion (eucharist)