Are lturgical documents prohibitive

[Semperviva]

Well, I'm not endorsing Protestant, um, practices per se, just say if the person is doing these things because it helps them to pray...I mean holding hands could help some people but hinder others...also in Melkite Church we raised our hands for the Our Fathers the way they do in some of the Catacombs iconography...but the point is...I don't thing those actions are inherently Protestant... Different rites/culture/people = different postures of prayer is all I'm saying...

[dspen2005]

The orans position -- which in the West is meant only for the priest to do -- during the Pater Noster, has become a position that many of the faithful themselves have taken.... I am not sure exactly how this started among Latin Rite Catholics... 2 stories come to mind: 1. it was an influence from AA meetings, and 2. it was a part of an overemphasis in the common priesthood of all believers. THis second story, by the way, has been a reason for some groups to gather around the alter to co-consecrate the Eucharist.....

I suppose, i have a fear in an even more protestantization of the Catholic Mass, than it already has become in many areas.

[journeyman]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Jun 22 2005, 08:29 PM']As Apotheon noted earlier, the divine revelation is complete.  And as I responded, our understanding is incomplete, only through additional study, through reiteration (not just repetition, but investigating, amending, changing (?)  can our understanding increase.
[/quote]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jun 23 2005, 12:17 AM']There can be no substantial development or change in either the Church's doctrine or liturgy.  There can be changes in incidentals, but no change can reverse what has already been defined. 

As far as the liturgy is concerned, any incidental changes made must be made by the legitimate authorities, and not by anyone else.
[right][snapback]620216[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jun 23 2005, 12:22 AM']Some people continue to promote the notion that we are somehow in the first century and that the liturgy can be changed by anyone who simply wants to add something to it that he thinks would be beneficial to the Church's life (as if the Church of the first century operated that way).  This attitude ignores historical reality, and it is clearly contrary to the directives issued by the Supreme Authority of the Church.  We live in the 21st century and the Magisterium of the Church, which alone as the authority to regulate the liturgy, has established guidelines for adaptations to the Roman Rite, no one may make changes outside of the norms instituted by the Apostolic See.  Perhaps if the Apostolic See renounced its own authority in the protection of the liturgy, then people could make whatever adaptations they desired, but I can tell you right now that the Supreme Magisterium is not going to renounce its God given authority.

The end.   


[right][snapback]620219[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Does this mean that understanding is frozen today, after 20 centuries of advances? I understand the "authority" to make official changes in the liturgy rests with the Magisterium. I understand that "unauthorized" changes by the laity are just that, unauthorized.

Are no further advances permitted? We aren't in the 1st century, or the 4th, or the 14th. Understanding and worship changed through these periods. Does Apotheon's position, if inflexibly held, prevent the development of our understanding or our worship in the future as if the Church were carved in stone? Are all future developments, for example, something like the "modern" Divine Mercy Chaplet, to be limited to personal devotions? Where will the Church obtain the fuel for its future advances if the deviations of the laity (or the parish priest) are not considered as possibly of merit, and passed up the hierarchy to the Magisterium for review,study, improvement, integration and possibly implementation?

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 23 2005, 12:07 AM'][right][snapback]619739[/snapback][/right]

Your beef ain't with me bud.  Its with the USCCB.  Its with the bishops we must obey.
[right][snapback]620211[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I understand that, but the norm is still the norm......so, your inferrence was backward, that is all I am saying.....nothing more, nothing less.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Jun 23 2005, 06:10 PM']Are no further advances permitted?  We aren't in the 1st century, or the 4th, or the 14th.  Understanding and worship changed through these periods.  Does Apotheon's position, if inflexibly held, prevent the development of our understanding or our worship in the future as if the Church were carved in stone?  Are all future developments, for example, something like the "modern" Divine Mercy Chaplet, to be limited to personal devotions?  Where will the Church obtain the fuel for its future advances if the deviations of the laity (or the parish priest) are not considered as possibly of merit, and passed up the hierarchy to the Magisterium for review,study, improvement, integration and possibly implementation?
[right][snapback]621094[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Just as a note of clarification. The Divine Mercy Chaplet is by definition a personal or private devotion, even if it is recited publicly, because it is not a specific "rite" or "ceremony" of the Divine Liturgy.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 23 2005, 09:20 AM']Well, I'm not endorsing Protestant, um, practices per se, just say if the person is doing these things because it helps them to pray...I  mean holding hands could help some people but hinder others...also in Melkite Church we raised our hands for the Our Fathers the way they do in some of the Catacombs iconography...but the point is...I don't thing those actions are inherently Protestant... Different rites/culture/people = different postures of prayer is all I'm saying...
[right][snapback]620513[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
As a fellow Easterner (seeing that you're Melkite) I'm sure you are already aware of the fact that whenever a person celebrates the liturgy within a [i]sui juris[/i] Church that is not his own, he should follow the liturgical customs and traditions of the Church in which he is worshipping.

The Latin Church should not be "Easternized" any more than the Eastern Catholic Churches should be Latinized. It is a sad reality that in the past the Latin Church had a tendency to push its own liturgical forms upon the Eastern Churches that are in communion with Rome.

That is why over the past forty years the Eastern Catholic Churches have been undergoing the painful task of de-Latinization, i.e., of having to expunge from their own practices (spiritual, liturgical, and theological) elements that do not conform to an Eastern understanding of the Christian mystery.

It would be just as bad for the Latin Church if Easterners began to meddle with the liturgy of the West. Moreover it is quite clear that the Supreme Authority of the Church is not looking to blend the different liturgical rites of the one Catholic Church into some kind of hybrid universal rite. In fact the process of de-Latinization on the part of the Eastern Catholic Churches, which has been ordered by the Apostolic See, concerns the integrity of the spiritual and theological traditions of Eastern (Byzantine) Christians, while also serving as an example to the Eastern Orthodox Churches, by showing them that it is truly possible for Eastern Christians to be in communion with the See of Rome, without losing that which makes them unique.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jun 23 2005, 09:09 PM']I understand that, but the norm is still the norm......so, your inferrence was backward, that is all I am saying.....nothing more, nothing less.
[right][snapback]621164[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

How is my inference backwards?

The norm was to kneel when we received the Eucharist
Today the norm is to stand. And now if one kneels, priests are required to "explain proper catechesis" to the congregant.


Where am I backwards?

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 24 2005, 09:23 AM']How is my inference backwards?

The norm was to kneel when we received the Eucharist
Today the norm is to stand.  And now if one kneels, priests are required to "explain proper catechesis" to the congregant. 
Where am I backwards?
[right][snapback]621414[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The norm is to kneel....the indult is given to the bishops to alter this, to standing. They have. That is not a norm, but it is an indult.

Cardinal Estevez is perfectly clear about that in the above post.

[Jaime]

[quote]The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. [/quote]

The GIRM is clear on this. My inference is not backwards. They call it out as a norm for the US.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jun 24 2005, 06:27 AM']The norm is to kneel....the indult is given to the bishops to alter this, to standing.  They have.  That is not a norm, but it is an indult.

Cardinal Estevez is perfectly clear about that in the above post.
[right][snapback]621417[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
You are completely correct. The universal norm in the Roman Rite when receiving holy communion is to kneel; the indult practice, permitted in various countries with the [i]recognitio[/i] of the Apostolic See, is to stand. In countries with the indult the lay faithful have the right to kneel when receiving communion if they so choose (see the clarifications issued by the Congregation for DIvine Worship on the Adoremus website).

[Apotheoun]

The same is true with the indult permitting communion in the hand. The universal norm in the Roman Rite is still to receive holy communion on the tongue.

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 24 2005, 09:31 AM']The GIRM is clear on this.  My inference is not backwards.  They call it out as a norm for the US.
[right][snapback]621423[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


[quote]In view of the law that "sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them" (canon 843 1), there should be no such refusal to any Catholic who presents himself for Holy Communion at Mass, except in cases presenting a danger of grave scandal to other believers arising out of the person's unrepented public sin or obstinate heresy or schism, publicly professed or declared. [b]Even where the Congregation has approved of legislation denoting standing as the posture for Holy Communion, in accordance with the adaptations permitted to the Conferences of Bishops by the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani n. 160, paragraph 2, it has done so with the stipulation that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds.[/b][/quote]

The bolding means that the practice instituted by the USCCB is an indult, which has [i]recognitio[/i] from the Holy See. The norm is to kneel. The indult (even if accepted practice) is to stand.

QED

[Apotheoun]

Did you have a double post there for a second? I thought I saw a double post. Is your Phatmass connection screwing up too?

[Cam42]

yep....but I fixed it.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jun 24 2005, 08:41 AM']The bolding means that the practice instituted by the USCCB is an indult, which has [i]recognitio[/i] from the Holy See.  The norm is to kneel.  The indult (even if accepted practice) is to stand.

QED
[right][snapback]621431[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Also from the GIRM.

[quote] “With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions that the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal” [/quote]

Therefore in the US, we are required by the GIRM to stand for Eucharist. The GIRM calls for it as a "norm" in the US.

Edited June 24, 2005 by jaime

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 24 2005, 07:23 AM']Therefore in the US, we are required by the GIRM to stand for Eucharist.  The GIRM calls for it as a "norm" in the US.
[right][snapback]621469[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
The norm of particular law in the United States is to stand, and this indult was granted by the Apostolic See, but the universal norm of law, which is to kneel for holy communion, remains in effect. Thus, whether to kneel or stand when receiving holy communion in the Roman Rite within the United States is left to the discretion of the communicant.

The following documents are clarifications issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments:

[quote]Congregation de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum

Prot. n. 1322/02/L

Rome, 1 July 2002

Your Excellency,

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has recently received reports of members of the faithful in your Diocese being refused Holy Communion unless while standing to receive, as opposed to kneeling. The reports state that such a policy has been announced to parishioners. There were possible indications that such a phenomenon might be somewhat more widespread in the Diocese, but the Congregation is unable to verify whether such is the case. This Dicastery is confident that Your Excellency will be in a position to make a more reliable determination of the matter, and these complaints in any event provide an occasion for the Congregation to communicate the manner in which it habitually addresses this matter, with a request that you make this position known to any priests who may be in need of being thus informed.

The Congregation in fact is concerned at the number of similar complaints that it has received in recent months from various places, and considers any refusal of Holy Communion to a member of the faithful on the basis of his or her kneeling posture to be a grave violation of one of the most basic rights of the Christian faithful, namely that of being assisted by their Pastors by means of the Sacraments ([i]Codex Iuris Canonici[/i], canon 213). In view of the law that "sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them" (canon 843  1), there should be no such refusal to any Catholic who presents himself for Holy Communion at Mass, except in cases presenting a danger of grave scandal to other believers arising out of the person's unrepented public sin or obstinate heresy or schism, publicly professed or declared. Even where the Congregation has approved of legislation denoting standing as the posture for Holy Communion, in accordance with the adaptations permitted to the Conferences of Bishops by the [i]Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani[/i] n. 160, paragraph 2, it has done so with the stipulation that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds.

In fact, as His Eminence, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has recently emphasized, the practice of kneeling for Holy Communion has in its favor a centuries-old tradition, and it is a particularly expressive sign of adoration, completely appropriate in light of the true, real and substantial presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ under the consecrated species.

Given the importance of this matter, the Congregation would request that Your Excellency inquire specifically whether this priest in fact has a regular practice of refusing Holy Communion to any member of the faithful in the circumstances described above and - if the complaint is verified - that you also firmly instruct him and any other priests who may have had such a practice to refrain from acting thus in the future. Priests should understand that the Congregation will regard future complaints of this nature with great seriousness, and if they are verified, it intends to seek disciplinary action consonant with the gravity of the pastoral abuse.

Thanking Your Excellency for your attention to this matter and relying on your kind collaboration in its regard,
Sincerely yours in Christ,

Jorge A. Cardinal Medina Estévez
Prefect

+Francesco Pio Tamburrino
Archbishop Secretary[/quote]

[quote]Congregation de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum

Prot. n. 1322/02/L

Rome, 1 July 2002

Dear Sir,

This Congregation for Divine Worship gratefully acknowledges receipt of your letter, regarding an announced policy of denial of Holy Communion to those who kneel to receive it at a certain church.

It is troubling that you seem to express some reservations about both the propriety and the usefulness of addressing the Holy See regarding this matter. Canon 212 2 of the [u]Code of Canon Law[/u] states that "Christ's faithful are totally free to make known their needs, especially their spiritual ones, and their desire: to the Pastor of the Church". The canon then continues in 3: "According to their own knowledge competence and position, they have the right, and indeed sometimes the duty, to present to the sacred Pastor; their opinions regarding those things that pertain to the good of the Church".... Accordingly, in consideration of the nature of the problem and the relative likelihood that it might or might not be resolved on the local level, every member of the faithful has the right of recourse to the Roman Pontiff either personally or by means of the Dicasteries or Tribunals of the Roman Curia.

Another fundamental right of the faithful, as noted in canon 213, is "the right to receive assistance by the sacred Pastors from the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the Sacraments". In view of the law that "sacred" ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them" (canon 843  1), there should be no such refusal to any Catholic who presents himself for Holy Communion at Mass, except in cases presenting a danger of grave scandal to other believers arising out of the person's unrepented public sin or obstinate heresy or schism, publicly professed or declared. Even where the Congregation has approved of legislation denoting standing as the posture for Holy Communion, in accordance with the adaptations permitted to the Conferences of Bishops by the [i]Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani[/i] n. 160, paragraph 2, it has done so with the stipulation that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds.

Please be assured that the Congregation takes this matter very seriously, and is making the necessary contacts in its regard. At the same time, this Dicastery continues to be ready to be of assistance if you should need to contact it again in the future.

Thanking you for your interest, and with every prayerful good wish, I am
Sincerely yours in Christ,

Monsignor Mario Marini
Undersecretary[/quote]

[quote]Congregation de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum

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 [i]recognitio[/i] of this Congregation, as regards the question of the posture for receiving Holy Communion.

As the authority by virtue of whose r[i]ecognitio[/i] 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 [i]recognitio[/i] 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,

Mons. Mario Marini
Undersecretary[/quote]

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 24 2005, 10:23 AM']Also from the GIRM.
Therefore in the US, we are required by the GIRM to stand for Eucharist.  The GIRM calls for it as a "norm" in the US.
[right][snapback]621469[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


It is an indult with the recognition of the Holy See. That is how the Holy See views it, it is how we are to view it. The GIRM is approved by the Prefect, who is now Cardinal Arinze, but was Cardinal Estevez. He spoke to the dubium that you are bringing up.

I quoted it. The judgment of the Prefect trumps the local Congregations. The Prefect is the governing authority, with the support of the Holy Father. In this instance, I know that recognitio normalizes the indult, but the fact of the matter is that the recoginito is applied to an indult, not the norm.

If it were a norm, why would there be a need for a respsonse from the Prefect and why would there be a need for recogintion from the Holy See on this matter?

Wouldn't it simply need to be stated?

Cardinal Estevez was speaking DIRECTLY to your citation.

[url="http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/LawText/Index/6/LawIndex/47"]Here[/url] is what Mons. Mario Marini says:
[quote name='A letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship responding to this question on 2/26/03']This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has received your letter dated 1 December 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 Congegation, 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.[/quote]

[Cam42]

Seems Appy and I think the same way on this issue.

[Jaime]

Both of you are overlooking
[quote]Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.[/quote]

Why is this in there if not for correction?

Also

[quote]With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions that the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal”[/quote]

So the question posed is this

If the USCCB calls out for standing to be the norm

if the GIRM calls out that we are to be uniform in gestures and postures

If we are to obey our bishops

If we are not to (as Apotheoun has said) do anything that turns the liturgy into a private prayer

How is receiving the Eucharist while kneeling "not" inappropriate in the US?

Edited June 24, 2005 by jaime

[Cam42]

[quote]How is receiving the Eucharist while kneeling "not" inappropriate in the US?[/quote]

Because the Prefect for Discipline of the Sacraments has said that it is not inappropriate. He has jurisdiction over this matter and the various congregations (which includes the USCCB). If he says it is ok, then it is ok.

He outranks and clarifies those things in which a dubium has been raised. He did that. He says it is ok, then it is ok.