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

[Lil Red]

"Stand unless you want to kneel."

That sounds more like "Do whatever you want to do. BLEEEP what the bishop says, it doesn't matter."

 

seriously....what the actual bleep..... :blink:

Edited January 24, 2014 by Lil Red

[Lil Red]

 

I wonder why they can't be plainer.  Something like:  We really hope you will stand at this point but if your conscience tells you to do something else, go for it.  But they don't.  And why would someone's conscience lead them to defy a bishop in an area where he has authority?  Why wouldn't someone's conscience lead them to unity instead of sticking out like a sore thumb?  They would have to be ignorant to be in good conscience on this issue.  Otherwise, it proceeds from pride.  

 

you can't know that. that is judgmental. you don't know what they've prayed and reflected upon. 

[IcePrincessKRS]

you can't know that. that is judgmental. you don't know what they've prayed and reflected upon. 

 

 

This is exactly what I was going to say. :like:

[NotreDame]

Hey Pliny... are you suuuure you aren't trolling?  :think: 

[Pliny]

you can't know that. that is judgmental. you don't know what they've prayed and reflected upon. 

 

Note that I excused ignorance.

 

But how can one in good conscience "pray and reflect upon" defying the bishop in his area of authority?  That seems to be contradictory.  

[Aloysius]

Honestly, if your bishop is standing right there and says "Hey, you, stand up for this part of Mass"... then MAYBE it's a different story.  if you wanted to be problematic you might in that instance think it was outside his competence, but as a matter of respect I'd probably just stand and be done with it in that scenario.... thing is, that scenario is NOT occurring.  the only time bishops were getting directly confrontational over posture was when some of them started trying to really order people to stop kneeling to receive communion, and the Vatican shot them down for doing so.  

 

And anyway, that's not what's being done here.  Bishops are setting norms in accordance with GIRM no. 43.  We have demonstrated that the mens of the Church in the interpretation of GIRM no. 43 norms for all the various parts of the mass is one of leniency for people who are kneeling out of personal piety as an option, even when the broadly defined norm is standing.  The Vatican views those norms as broad limits that are not rigid obligations.  The Bishops themselves in debating the US adaptation of GIRM 43 basically agreed they wanted to pastorally allow standing where it had already ended up getting a foothold as the custom while allowing for the laudable retention of kneeling where that was the custom.  You're not defying the bishop, you're not being disobedient to the bishop, because the bishop's norm is not a command, it's not an obligation, it's a GIRM 43 norm for lay posture... and GIRM no. 43 norms for the postures of the laity should be interpreted as "broad limits" that do not "rigidly regulate", and kneeling is NOT forbidden by them even when the GIRM norm says to stand.

[Slappo]

Note that I excused ignorance.

 

But how can one in good conscience "pray and reflect upon" defying the bishop in his area of authority?  That seems to be contradictory.  

 

1. Not defying the bishop.

2. Not his area of authority.

 

That's how I do what I do in good conscience every Sunday.

 

 

Also look at it this way: If the normal posture is standing, someone kneeling is not disrupting unity. It is no different than the elderly that stay seated, the 2 year olds that got tired of standing etc. You are below standard eye level and are not blocking anyone's view if they want to look at what the priest is doing, look at a statute, the crucifix, an icon, etc. If the standard posture is kneeling and someone wants to stand, then all of a sudden he sticks out like a huge major sore thumb as the lone person out of 200 standing in the room (even though he has every right to stand).

 

If I were a bishop I would probably set/keep the norm as standing if it was already common custom when I was consecrated even though I prefer to kneel as a layman.

 

 

Honestly I get really tired of the legalistic view American Roman Catholic's have on rubrics. I don't want to be questioned because I make the sign of the cross shortly after the confiteor even though I'm not told that I have to make the sign of the cross at that time. I make the sign of the cross to remember my baptism, give thanks for Christ's mercy, and the forgiveness of all venial sins just conferred upon the faithful at mass. It helps me pray, brings me to holiness, so I do it. It's a sacramental. That's what they are for. The same goes for every other unobtrusive sacramental or posture at mass.

 

Key word is unobtrusive. Something like dancing down the isles for liturgical dance is obtrusive and expressly forbidden.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Slappo

[PadrePioOfPietrelcino]

As well...not previously cited (I think) in this discussion is GIRM #390, I had written out the whole thing, then my computer went wonky and I lost what I had typed...anywho...#390 makes it clear that in regulating the posture of the faithful such as in #43, 273, it is the role of the CONFERENCE of Bishops and they must receive recognitio from the Apostolic See.

 

GIRM 387 Speaks of a Diocesan Bishop's competence in 1) concelebrating, 2) establish norms regarding the serving of the Priest at the Altar, 3) the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds 4) Construction and ordering of Churches

 

So as it seems it is clear that a local Bishop can not make this decision on his own, we must view it in light of the Conferences' established norms with apostolic recognitio and thus the clarifications that also come from the Apostolic See on the GIRM. Kneeling has thus been preserved as an option universally in the Church? How does one's exercise of a universal option bring disunity? How can you say following a universal instruction of the Apostolic See is prideful? obedience is good, but when your Bishop is still in unity with the entire magisterium then his request must still be viewed in the whole and some people may be drawn to exercise their pysical posture in a certain way that is not the norm, but perfectly acceptable.

[Nihil Obstat]

Note that I excused ignorance.

 

But how can one in good conscience "pray and reflect upon" defying the bishop in his area of authority?  That seems to be contradictory.  

Ultra. Vires.

The bishop does not, and as we have seen, cannot command you to stand if you would prefer to kneel. Therefore it is not defiance, it is exercising of your own prerogative.

[Lil Red]

Note that I excused ignorance.

 

But how can one in good conscience "pray and reflect upon" defying the bishop in his area of authority?  That seems to be contradictory.  

 

at this point, I assume you're trolling because Padre and Al have both given you more than satisfactory answers, you're just sticking your fingers in your ears going "La la la la la la, I can't hear you." 

[Slappo]

 "La la la la la la, I can't hear you read." 

:)

[NotreDame]

I would say that talk writing is cheap.  It's obviously time for you to put your money where your mouth is. 

 

You need to print out all relevant materials, head out to all the different masses and parishes you can find, identify anyone who is kneeling when they should stand (or vice-versa) and then explain things to them just like you did here on this thread.

 

I'd like you to keep a journal of all your interactions so you can report back in detail Monday with your results. 

[Pliny]

at this point, I assume you're trolling because Padre and Al have both given you more than satisfactory answers, you're just sticking your fingers in your ears going "La la la la la la, I can't hear you." 

 

You're assuming the wrong thing.  It's interesting that you accuse me of making a judgement yet you judge me to be a "troll" because your friends haven't convinced me.  You don't know what's in my heart and mind.  Are you going to prohibit me from making any more posts?

 

The answers given are satisfactory for YOU, not ME.  I'm not convinced.  I can see how they can make the interpretations they have provided but I do not see their interpretations as definitive.  If I were looking for justification to contradict my bishop, what has been provided is interesting but not sufficient. Besides that, they are not the only ones to whom I have responded.

 

On some boards what you have done in this thread would be considered "trolling" since all you did was copy and paste other posts and did some "cheerleading" without offering anything of substance.

 

I'll go to my priest tomorrow and see if my pastor agree the bishop does not have this liturgical authority.

 

 

Edited January 24, 2014 by Pliny

[PadrePioOfPietrelcino]

Pliny, I would like to change my advice to you regarding whether you would like to address your friend...because it SEEMS to me that you are confused a little on this issue. First, I think you should withhold a discussion unless you are understand what is being said about the options being present and that both are legitimate in this case. If you DO see that then great and we are just talking past each other. If you do understand that then proceed with a friendly discussion about why you think standing is the BETTER option because it reinforces local obedience and unity for you. I do realize your not trying to liturgically police anybody, but this does SEEM to be an area in the United States especially we can be a bit scrupulous in our interpretations of the right way we can approach God.

[Lil Red]

You're assuming the wrong thing.  It's interesting that you accuse me of making a judgement yet you judge me to be a "troll" because your friends haven't convinced me.  You don't know what's in my heart and mind.  Are you going to prohibit me from making any more posts?

 

The answers given are satisfactory for YOU, not ME.  I'm not convinced.  I can see how they can make the interpretations they have provided but I do not see their interpretations as definitive.  If I were looking for justification to contradict my bishop, what has been provided is interesting but not sufficient. Besides that, they are not the only ones to whom I have responded.

 

On some boards what you have done in this thread would be considered "trolling" since all you did was copy and paste other posts and did some "cheerleading" without offering anything of substance.

 

I'll go to my priest tomorrow and see what he has to say.

 

I didn't know a priest was posting here, and I don't know which poster he is.  If I have failed to offer proper deference and respect, I apologize.

 

Why articulate again what others have done so more satisfactorily than I? I have proven myself on these boards over and over again, as someone who has been a member for more than 10 years. I don't feel the need to prove myself in every thread, to every poster. 

 

Padre = short for PadrePioOfPietrelcino or whatever his name is. 

 

This thread has given satisfactory answers to pretty much everyone but stubborn ole you. Print out what people have said here, take them to your bishop and ask him what he says. Otherwise, I don't honestly see the reason for this thread to stay open any longer and am reporting it to be closed.