www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Kneeling Is A Mortal Sin!

Eli: I have made exactly this point on the issue of restoring the practice of no kneeling on Sundays in the BCC. Nevertheless, I do and will certainly follow the practice established by the diocese and within the parish. We have not only lost the idea of penetential reverence, we have also lost any sense of the virtue of obedience. That is a problem.

djs,

I think you are at risk of oversimplifying if you assert that this can be reduced to mere "bishop bashing".

If in fact the bishop has the authority and it falls within his discretion to change the posture of the people during worship - fine. The people should comply. Let it be done, if he so wills. But to John's point, be pastoral about it. (Again, I have no particular attachment to kneeling.) BUT if he is acting in defiance of a directive from the Latin Patriachate of Rome, then he and Father Tran are helping to create division within the local church - not the faithful who continue with the legitimate practice.

As to where these issues might interrelate with situations within the Metropolia, I think a wider discretionary power is given to the hierarchy of a church sui juris...although there are limits...as well as checks and balances. Such discretionary power I would think would be even broader within a Patriarchate.

The Diocese of Orange qualifies as neither. :rolleyes:

I would like to see a response from the diocese as well.

My broader point is that I think we should encourage the Latins to be...well, Latin and orthodox, with an understanding and an appreciation of the East. The more each church is what is it called to be, the stronger the whole communion of churches will be.

Gordo

Gordo: If you don't even know if the practice is within the Bishop's authority, then how on earth were you identifying "guilty parties".

In this light of agreement, I think that what I would say, and do say, is that judgment against the lay resistence be withheld.

The context of the entire situation is in flux at the moment [pun intended after the fact]. There are more liturgical changes coming from Rome and things are liable to get much worse before they get better.

Taking a Tridentine parish and trying to bludgeon it into submission to a questionable practice in the first place, under the circumstances, is neither wise nor just. It is merely a raw exercise of juridical power meant to stamp out anyone who is not on board with the heterodox agenda of the bishop and those faithful to the bishop's heterodoxy.

And I do not think it is bishop bashing to expect exemplary archetypical behavior from the supreme shepherds of a See. It is not bashing to hold to a higher standard, one who holds absolute power.

Eli

Dear Friends,

I really think this thread as a whole doesn't belong on any Eastern Christian forum.

It is simply an internal matter of the Latin Church and there are chat forums galore that would be the appropriate places to discuss this matter.

There are old arguments being resurrected here that will doubtless lead to more nastiness - I feel it coming on, in fact!

I ask the Administrator-Moderator to consider closing it or else moving it - to the nearest Latin Catholic chat forum . . .

Alex

I am sympathetic to your point here djs, which may undermine my own somewhat. I agree that we should restore standing within the Byzantine tradition. I know of some people who do so at various points in other churches while everyone else kneels...and it IS somewhat disruptive to the worship. I guess visually the idea of "standing" while everyone else is kneeling creates more of an issue than the other way around. People who kneel while others are standing don't stand out (literally! ) as much. (Even the photos appear to have them in the back of the church.)

If these folks were simply professional "kneelers" who went from church to church "kneeling" in protest, that would be one thing. But they are more than likely parishioners who attended the Latin Tridentine worship and who still wish to remain part of the parish while observing the legitimate traditions of the church. (Which were eliminated once the parish stopped celebrating the Tridentine Mass.)

For me personally, whether in Rome or Constantinople I observe the practice of the congregation. I am not interested in making a "statement" either way, although I have my preferences and I believe in our traditions and long for them to be celebrated everywhere by everyone!

But let's not forget that what precipitated this mess was a change from one practice to another (from kneeling to standing). The kneelers have a legitimate claim to their practice as being traditional. IMHO, the onus is on the Bishop and whomever introduced the change in practice, not the kneeling faithful.

Gordo

Perhaps, but there are implications for the Eastern Churches, as have been observed by djs and others.

djs,

I was going based on what is written in the GIRM and on Pavel's post.

Here is an article that may shed some light on the matter.

Hope that helps...

Gordo

Dear Gordo,

Forgive me, but I fail to see ANY implications of this for the Eastern Churches.

Our tradition is to stand, but many parishes, as David the Byzantine Carmelite has noted, kneel. I've yet to see the matter made into an issue by any bishop of ours, whether pro-Eastern or pro-Western.

I appeal to the Moderator, once he gets back from his day job ( ) to consider moving this thread to the nearest Latin Catholic forum.

Pax Vobiscum!

Alex

Gordo I did not pronounce on the rightness or wrongness of the standing issue, I was merely saying that the spirits of their hearts could be done in a defiance against spiritual authority and hence sinful.
Stephanos I

I see several implications for both eastern Catholics and for Orthodox Catholics. Perhaps not in the particular substance of standing vis a vis kneeling, but certainly in a discussion of issues of authority and chains of administrative command in the Church.

For example, there is an idea already expressed that a Metropolitan Archbishop has more power and authority than a local ordinary. That is not a canonical fact, in fact.

Then there is the perception of the Orthodox that the person in the papal office has untrammeled authority to operate or exercise authority at the parish level or diocesan level and that is not a canonical fact either.

So these kinds of issues in their larger context are exemplars for the universal Church as well as the particular instant.

Also Alex, I think it is not such a good thing to predict negatively against people who are trying to communicate over difficult subjects. There is a certain amount of self-correction that must be allowed among diverse peoples in order to keep a genuine peace.

Father has been exceptionally adept in keeping this discussion on an even keel.

Eli

The absence of kneeling in the Latin Rite is historically perceived as irreverent behaviour. Because an anti-traditional priest or bishop, views it differently doesn't change the fact.

I know, Father. Sorry - my post was addressed to the broader issue.

But in general terms, I think you are correct.

And kneeling or standing does not rise to the level of faith and morals as an issue for the faithful.

Alex,

The implication is not whether one should kneel or stand per se, but on the limitations that exist on the authority of a local bishop or priest within a particular church and ritual tradition to adopt forms that are foreign to the tradition of that rite.

Is that not part of the issue with Latinizations? Is that not what I and others have also witnessed in the Maronite church and also in varying ways in the BCC?

I know of a Byzantine priest who distributes communion using the phrase: "The Body and Blood of Christ. Amen." He also blesses according to the Latin form. I find this to be problematic. Will I refuse to recieve the Holy Gifts until he says the proper Byzantine prayers? Absolutely not. But the ritual "mixing" is an issue for the Catholic East, and it is something which should be addressed in some way.

In this case, we have a Latin church adopting an Eastern posture which is foreign to its rite.

Unless I am missing something, it is very relevant. But I gladly "bend the knee" and humbly defer to the judgement of our esteemed moderator!

Gordo

Since there are many objections to this topic I will only make one more comment...

There are too many options given to the Bishops to choose from for liturgical practices which causes problems diocese to diocese etc...

Get rid of the options...

As for discussing different Rites...either discuss all variations and their particulars or limit the topics to Byzantine period...sorry if its harsh...I'm tired of those who pick and choose then bellyache later...

PAX

james

Dear Eli,

The traditional Eastern perception of episcopal authority is that it is . . . absolute.

One follows the directives of one's bishop in the first instance and that is that.

The entire notion of deciding when a bishop is not to be obeyed, or who has more authority over him which means one may appeal to it etc. - is perhaps a fine Latin tradition (and I wouldn't know nor care to), but it has no relevance for the Eastern Churches, Catholic or Orthodox.

Apart from that, why is a discussion introduced here to defend kneeling from the standpoint of traditionalism? How is that relevant to Eastern Christians whose tradition is decidedly against it?

This argument is also brought up in a number of EC parishes I've attended where "Latin Catholic refugees" from the Novus Ordo insist on it to the point of telling their EC parochial hosts that standing throughout the Divine Liturgy is an act of disrespect to God etc. In my parish where NO kneeling is practiced, we have those who simply flaunt what everyone else does and kneel to Communion etc. As I have an aunt who belongs to this group, I can tell you that they truly do believe that standing is sinfully disrespectful of God during the Divine Liturgy and that it is their "mission" to bring the EC Churches back to the "proper" ways etc.

Many of us here have simply had enough of that nonsense and of being obliged to engage in this discussion from the standpoint of Latin Catholic liturgical praxis.

THAT is certainly disrespectful, I believe, to the Eastern Christian spirit on this forum, especially when there are plenty of Latin Catholic forums, traditionalist and liberal, where such issues can be debated fruitfully, with the participation of priests in the know with respect to Latin canonical law.

Even when the UGCC in Canada issued its statement on the Filioque, there was no "ukase" involved forcing any parish to remove it.

That is just not our style.

I reiterate the Administrator's own stated policy for this forum that it reflect the concerns of Eastern Christianity and that issues especially dealing with the internal praxis of the Latin Catholic Church be taken elsewhere.

Ultimately and ideally, Eastern Orthodox DO see kneeling on Sundays as sinful - as it breaks the canons and tradition of the Church that forbids it at certain times and liturgical seasons.

For us, it is an expression of humility in the face of our own personal sinfulness - and such has NO place on the day of the Lord's glorious Resurrection and during the Paschal period when we celebrate it continually.

Alex

Dear James,

Rite on!

I kneel to you, sir . . .

On both knees . . .

Alex