Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."

Bald Eagles Are No Longer Threatened!

bald_eagles

The bald eagle population has risen by almost a factor of twenty and they no longer qualify as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. This is a double victory (a) because a species has been saved and (b) because the species in question is a national symbol.

You’d think that this would be good news.

But some environmentalists aren’t pleased. When people first started talking about de-listing the bald eagle, some environmentalists were concerned. They didn’t want any species ever de-listed. They acted as if they wanted the endangered and threatened species lists to be a one-way list that could only gain but never lose members.

Now it remains to be seen whether the same environmentalists will try to accuse the Bush administration for “shooting the national symbol” by admitting that the bald eagle is no longer threatened.

In the mean time . . .

USA! USA! USA!

Genuflecting Before Communion?

A reader writes:

Since converting and having a great respect for the Eucharist, I have always genuflected before receiving the Eucharist. The New General Instructions of the Roman Missal says the norm for receiving is to bow. Today I genuflected and was confronted by the priest (at a parish I was visiting). Our parish priest told us the norm was to bow but if we desired to genuflect it could not be denied us.

Was I wrong to genuflect and was I wrong to suggest to the priest that he was wrong — and that one could not “forbidden” from genuflecting?

The situation in the law is not as clear and explicit as one would want, and to disern Rome’s attitude to this question one must look at more than one document. First, here is what the American version of the GIRM says:

The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.

When receiving Holy Communion, the communicant bows his or her head before the sacrament as a gesture of reverence and receives the Body of the Lord from the minister. The consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or in the hand at the discretion of each communicant. When Holy Communion is received under both kinds, the sign of reverence is also made before receiving the Precious Blood [GIRM 160].

The way the law is written, in America one should make a bow of the head before receiving Communion and then receive standing. The way Americans read law, this would be interpreted to mean that you don’t do anything else, like make a genuflection before receiving.

However, things are more complicated than that. To see why, let’s look at a different passage from the GIRM:

In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.

With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions which the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal [GIRM 43].

Here again we have a passage dealing with the posture of the faithful in America. The way Americans read law, it would be interpreted strictly. But that interpretation is misleading. The law has to be understood in the sense in which it is intended by Rome (which approved the law and whose interpretation of the law is definitive), and Romans do not read law the same way Americans do. Americans tend to take a much stricter interpretation of law that admits of no exceptions unless they are stated in the text itself. Vatican officials, however, often understand laws in a more permissive way that allows for unwritten exceptions.

The latter appears to be what is going on here. In the Roman Curia, and in Europe in general, they take a much more relaxed view of posture than we do. Frankly, curial officials don’t understand why Americans are such posture Nazis. In their view, the basic posture is spelled out in the law, but if some individuals choose to assume a different posture, it’s no big deal (as long as the person isn’t being disruptive of others, e.g., by doing backflips down the central aisle while going to Communion).

This is something that people with a sound formation in liturgical law have known for a long time, however it recently became possible to document it. In a response issued June 5, 2003, the CDW issued a response which stated:

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after having individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Responsum: Negative, et ad mensum [and for this reason]. The mens [reasoning] is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on the one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

This response deals specifically with the question of kneeling after receiving Communion, but it also states Rome’s general interpretation of the posture provisions of the GIRM for the laity, which is that the provisions are “to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly.”

This applies to GIRM 160’s statement regarding doing a bow as much as it applies to kneeling before, during, or after Communion. In fact, if the Holy See takes a non-rigid attitude toward kneeling before, during, or after Communion then it is a fortiori obvious that the same attitude is taken toward genuflecting, which is a much less dramatic thing to do posture-wise than kneeling.

The Holy See is getting tired of receiving complaints from America about priests and others denying people Communion, publicly humiliating them, or privately browbeating them for assuming traditional postures that express the faithful’s reverence for Christ in the Eucharist.

In fact, Rome has become concerned about lack of reverence for the Eucharist, and they’re going to have a problem with the laity being forbidden or browbeaten over assuming any traditional posture that they feel they need to assume to express their personal reverence for Christ in the Eucharist.

More could be said on this, but that’s the basic answer. If you want to go on genuflecting before you receive, Rome won’t have a problem with that. To decrease the chances that today’s situation will recur in the future, you might consider genuflecting just before you reach the head of the Communion line (i.e., when the person in front of you is receiving) and then make a bow when you are at the head.

Hope this helps!