Bishop Tod Brown is at it again. He's still telling parishionersat St. Mary's by the Sea in Huntington Beach, California--through the pastor to whom he's giving full support-- that kneeling during the Mass is a mortal sin. The diocese and the pastor have decreed that the faithful must stand during the Eucharistic Canon, yet the Roman Missal says we are to kneel during those parts. One of the adaptations approved use in the US says:
43.3 - People should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer. The faithful kneel at the Ecce Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.
It doesn't say that the faithful kneel during the Eucharistic Prayer unless the bishop says otherwise. The option is only given for the Agnus Dei. So why are they persecuting these people?
Kneeling as liturgical abuseUpdate: It's a bit of a stretch to say that Bishop Brown called kneeling a mortal sin. Those were the words of Fr. Tran, while Brown has said he gives his full backing to Tran. I'd say it's an implicit endorsement of Tran's comments, but it's not explicit.
Meanwhile, what's up with the following from the LA Times article? See what I mean after the jump.
Isn't it amazing that with all the liturgical abuse, all the hanky panky going on in the Mass, all the bizarre homilies being preached, it is the desire of the faithful to give due reverence to the Lord in the Eucharist that elicits this ire from the bishop and pastor. In the end, I don't think this is about rubrics. It's about a bishop and a priest angry about having their authority questioned so publicly by these "backward" traditionalists. Diogenes points a Helen Hitchcock quote in the LA Times article:
Helen Hitchcock, who is quoted in the Times story, points out that it's telling that a prelate of the "Let a hundred flowers bloom" school should bring the hammer down against diversity:
"It's hard to understand why any bishop would prohibit his people from expressing reverence in the way they have done for centuries," said Helen Hull Hitchcock, a founder of the conservative Adoremus Society for the Renewal of Sacred Liturgy in St. Louis.
Update: Here's the bit I wanted to mention in the LA Times article:
Lesa Truxaw, the Orange Diocese director of worship, said Bishop Tod D. Brown banned kneeling because standing "reflects our human dignity. It's not that we think we're equal to God, but we recognize that we are made in the image and likeness of God."
Orange County parishioners are still allowed to kneel at other points in the Mass, including the Eucharistic prayers. Kneeling is optional as worshippers receive communion.
If we're supposed to stand because it recognizes that we are made in the image and likeness of God, then why doesn't Brown order that we stand throughout the Mass, including during the Canon? It's because the only option given to the local bishop is that time specifically after the Agnus Dei. It is not under the bishop's authority to order people not to kneel during the Canon. Yet if Brown's "image and likeness" argument were true, then we should always stand. In other words, it's a load of bunk, and Brown would order it if he could, but he can't so he won't.
I am flabbergasted that the bishop would choose to make a fight over this! Of all the matters and subjects: I’m sure both “trads” and “progs” could think if five things dear to their hearts they’d rather have a bishop go to battle over, if battle he must.
I am mistaken in thinking that his Excellency, Bishop Brown, is the only bishop in the U.S. to take this approach?
At our cathedral, in my archdiocese, programs advise people to remain standing. They don’t. No one has been treated this way. I think my archbishop realizes that this is not the fight to have.
Comments are being moderated. After you submit your comment it could take up to a couple hours, but usually only a few minutes, before it will appear. Thank you for your patience. If you have any questions, you may contact Domenico Bettinelli.
Kneeling as a mortal sin
Bishop Tod Brown is at it again. He's still telling parishionersat St. Mary's by the Sea in Huntington Beach, California--through the pastor to whom he's giving full support-- that kneeling during the Mass is a mortal sin. The diocese and the pastor have decreed that the faithful must stand during the Eucharistic Canon, yet the Roman Missal says we are to kneel during those parts. One of the adaptations approved use in the US says: It doesn't say that the faithful kneel during the Eucharistic Prayer unless the bishop says otherwise. The option is only given for the Agnus Dei. So why are they persecuting these people?Kneeling as liturgical abuse Update: It's a bit of a stretch to say that Bishop Brown called kneeling a mortal sin. Those were the words of Fr. Tran, while Brown has said he gives his full backing to Tran. I'd say it's an implicit endorsement of Tran's comments, but it's not explicit. Meanwhile, what's up with the following from the LA Times article? See what I mean after the jump.
Technorati Tags: Catholic, liturgy, bishop, Mass, sin
Isn't it amazing that with all the liturgical abuse, all the hanky panky going on in the Mass, all the bizarre homilies being preached, it is the desire of the faithful to give due reverence to the Lord in the Eucharist that elicits this ire from the bishop and pastor. In the end, I don't think this is about rubrics. It's about a bishop and a priest angry about having their authority questioned so publicly by these "backward" traditionalists. Diogenes points a Helen Hitchcock quote in the LA Times article: Update: Here's the bit I wanted to mention in the LA Times article:If we're supposed to stand because it recognizes that we are made in the image and likeness of God, then why doesn't Brown order that we stand throughout the Mass, including during the Canon? It's because the only option given to the local bishop is that time specifically after the Agnus Dei. It is not under the bishop's authority to order people not to kneel during the Canon. Yet if Brown's "image and likeness" argument were true, then we should always stand. In other words, it's a load of bunk, and Brown would order it if he could, but he can't so he won't.COMMENTS
I wonder if Cdl. Arinze could be persuaded to discuss this on his audio blog.
Posted by RC on 05/28/06 at 11:45 PM
I am flabbergasted that the bishop would choose to make a fight over this! Of all the matters and subjects: I’m sure both “trads” and “progs” could think if five things dear to their hearts they’d rather have a bishop go to battle over, if battle he must.
Posted by Fr Martin Fox on 05/29/06 at 07:33 AM
Fr. Philip: He did not say it explicitly so I’ve amended the post accordingly.
John: Thanks for the link, but that’s the story link I already put in my post. Your link is redundant.
Posted by Domenico Bettinelli on 05/29/06 at 03:50 PM
I am mistaken in thinking that his Excellency, Bishop Brown, is the only bishop in the U.S. to take this approach?
At our cathedral, in my archdiocese, programs advise people to remain standing. They don’t. No one has been treated this way. I think my archbishop realizes that this is not the fight to have.
Posted by Fr Martin Fox on 05/29/06 at 05:19 PM
Comments are being moderated. After you submit your comment it could take up to a couple hours, but usually only a few minutes, before it will appear. Thank you for your patience. If you have any questions, you may contact Domenico Bettinelli.