Responses to Questions on Kneeling for Holy Communion by the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments

In 2002, the USA Bishops released a decree stating that the norm for reception of Holy Communion was standing. However, the Magisterium has always given Catholics the right to kneel. Due to various abuses of priests denying reception of those who kneel for Holy Communion, the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments in the Vatican has published the following responses to questions in the November-December 2002 edition (and later) of Notitiae, their official publication. These responses represent the view of the Holy See on the questions of kneeling to receive Holy Communion and the right of Catholics to address concerns to the Holy See, as well as the right to kneel for Holy Communion without being accused of disobedience.
____________________________________________________________________________

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 (Codex Iuris Canonici, 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 ß 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 Institution 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.

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

___________________________________________________________________________________

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 ß 2 of the Code of Canon Law 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 ß 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 ß 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 Institution 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.

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

____________________________________________________________________________________

Congregation de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum

Prot. n. 47 / 03 / L

Rome , 26 February 2003

Dear [name deleted],

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has received through official channels 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 Congregation, 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.

With every prayerful good wish, I am

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Mons . Mario Marini
Undersecretary

THREE EASY WAYS TO DESTROY SOLA SCRIPTURE by Isahel 'Don' Alfonso

“THREE EASY WAYs TO REBUT SOLA SCRIPTURA”


We frequently hear from Catholic Apologists the saying that “Sometimes the best defense is offense” these three step method of debunking the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura is both an Offense and Defense in the hand of a Catholic Apologist.
The easiest way to stun a Protestant in the middle of a conversation about doctrines is to play dumb, don’t try to ask obvious tricky questions instead ask him simple definitions.
During a conversation with a pastor I tried to play dumb I asked him questions like what do you mean by “Faith alone, grace, faith etc.” Asking him these types of questions made him believed that I was innocent about Christian doctrines, this turns off his defensive mode to offensive mode, making himself and his position vulnerable to my hard hitting questions.
Sensing that he is now vulnerable and over confident, I was quick to use the three step method of debunking Sola Scriptura.
I asked him to define Sola Scriptura.
And his reply was “The phrase sola scriptura is from the Latin: sola having the idea of "alone," "ground," "base," and the word scriptura meaning "writings" - referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. "All Scripture is 'God breathed' (given of inspiration of God) and is profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16)
Since I had him to answer this type of question he had no single idea that this is a trap question.
After he answered my question, I asked another question; what are the criteria used by the early Christians to determine which Scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit and should be included in the Bible?
Again without a single idea that I was trying to trap him he answered the question quoting from the book of John Schwarz “A Handbook of the Christian Faith” He said three criteria;
The authors had to have had apostolic credentials or have enjoyed a close association with an apostle, such as Mark with Peter and Luke with Paul.
The writings had to be consistent with the church’s teachings about Jesus.
The Writings had to have had church-wide acceptance and usage.
These are the criteria used by the early Christians to know which Scripture is inspired and must be a part of the Bible.
What I love about arguments is when your opponent doesn’t know what will hit them, after carefully setting him up I am now ready to drop the last and final blow to him.
My last question is, base on the principle of Sola Scriptura as you said lately when you defined Sola Scriptura, where in the Bible can you find these three criteria in determining which Scripture is inspired and should be part of the Bible?
Try to guess what his answer is, none. He tried to change the topic by saying “The apostles believed in Sola Scriptura they were using the Old Testament when they preach”, sensing that he is trapped I kept on pinning him on my question, until he gave up and honestly said “that is a very tough and unusual question, give me some time to look it up and get back to you”
Good luck on looking it up three years have pass but until now I never heard from him again he didn’t even try to answer the question.
ANALYSIS
On the third question he has only three ways to answer the question;
A.) Quote passages from the bible. If he did this it would be a self refuting preposition since he has yet to prove that the scripture is inspired by God, thus quoting from the Bible is a fallacy and a major blunder in an argument.
B.) Shoot arrows to the moon by saying that it is God who determines which Scripture is inspired and early Christians are the only one’s who gathered what God has already determine. Why bother to answer question number two and quote from the book about the criteria if God is the one who determines it?
C.) The criteria are set by the early Christians to know which book is inspired. If he chose to answer these it would be the same as saying that an outside Biblical authority was the one who discern which scripture is inspired, therefore destroying the very fabric of the Doctrine Sola Scriptura. So far so good most Protestant friends and pastors that I encountered when I used these steps they didn’t answer any of the three choices they choose to change the topic.
SUMMARY
To use this technique pretend that you know nothing or wanting to know something, by doing so your Protestant friend will turn off his defensive mode making him/her vulnerable to your trap. And don’t let him/her change the topic stick to the three step method;
Let him define Sola Scriptura
Ask him about the criteria used by the early Christians to determine which scripture is inspired and should be a part of the Bible.
And lastly, ask him basing on the principle of Sola Scriptura where in the Bible can you find the criteria used by the early Christians to determine which Scripture is inspired and should be a part of the Bible.
If properly executed your Protestant friend has nowhere to go its either he will answer the question with foolish answers or admit that an outside Biblical authority the Church is responsible for discerning which scripture is inspired and should be part of the Bible, either/or Sola Scriptura is already destroyed.


REFERENCE: thesplendorofthechurch.blogspot.com

What is the proper posture of the faithful during the Our Father of the Holy Mass?

If we are going to follow the official rule for the Our Father in the Mass the hands of the people must be clasped, closed in prayer while the hands of the priest are the ones raised because he is the minister of Christ interceding for the people.

In the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite or the Latin Mass in fact, only the priest recites the Our Father and the people only recites the last line: "Sed libera nos a malo" [And deliver us from evil.]

The practice of the people raising their hands in Our Father came from the Protestant heretics. It was imitated by some priests and lay leaders and soon it became popularized. Because the lay are eager to imitate the actions of priests so they want as much as possible to do what they are doing during the Mass. This is very unfortunate. We have lost the special liturgical actions actually done by the Blessed Mother and the early lay Catholics who used to clasp their hands and bow their heads when praying the Our Father. Instead, nowadays people prefer the manner of praying of the Pharisees. Proudly looking at the heavens, with hands raised.

In the original Latin liturgy, the priest is looking at the Cross as a remembrance of the Humility and Sacrifice of Christ and his hands are set apart, raised but only shoulder-length in order not to imitate the proud bearing of the Pharisees.

The habit of holding hands during the Our Father of the Mass, I believe, started during the days prior or during the EDSA Revolution wherein our people need more practical signs of unity due to the political and social darkness overshadowing the nation: Marcos Dictatorship, the shadows of martial law, uncertainty of the political situations, social unrest, etc. However, now that the extraordinary time has passed we have to return to the regular manner of worship.

So, please close your hands during the Our Father.



Reference: thesplendorofthechurch.blogspot.com