I have been asked a question lately that I thought our group might enjoy re-visiting. “Why do Catholics celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday, the first day of the week, instead of Saturday the seventh day of the week, as the Jewish people do in commemoration of when God “rested on the seventh day?” (Most of what you are about to read has been taken from the Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraphs 2168-2188).

The Book of Exodus tells us the “seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord.” In speaking of the Sabbath, we recall God’s creative work when He created the heavens and the earth. We are told in Exodus that God worked for six days and “on rested on the seventh, therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it”. Scripture also reveals to us that the Lord’s Day is a Remembrance Day, a memorial of Israel’s liberation from bondage in Egypt. In Deuteronomy we are told our God commands us to keep holy the Sabbath day as a remembrance of the deliverance from the Egyptians. God gave Israel the Sabbath as a sign of His irrevocable covenant with her. We are told to keep holy the Sabbath to remind us of the creation bestowed upon us by God and of His merciful act of deliverance. As we are made in the image and likeness of God, God’s actions are to be imitated by man. Man emulates God and is encouraged to act like Him in all things. Therefore it was only natural for man to rest on the seventh day as God did. It is also considered a protest against the servitude of work and the earthly worship of money.

When Jesus came, He renewed the covenant of His Father but in a very profound and different way. It did not go unnoticed by the early Christians that Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the new week. It took no time at all for them to realize that God began His work for His first creation on the “first day”. Because Jesus rose on the “eighth” day of the week, the “first” day of the new week, it began to symbolize for Christians immediately, the first day of the new creation bestowed upon them by Christ’s resurrection. For Christians it became the first of all days, the most important day of their lives, the first of all feast days, the Lord’s Day - Sunday! St. Justin, an early Church Doctor who lived shortly after Christ wrote, “We all gather on the day of the sun, for it is the first day (after the Jewish sabbath, but also the first day) when God, separating matter from darkness, made the world; and on this same day Jesus Christ our Saviour rose from the dead.”

In the days following Christ’s death, for a brief period, Sunday was distinguished from the Sabbath. For Christians, because of its significant meaning, Sunday soon became their Sabbath. For them Sunday now fulfilled the spiritual truth of the Jewish Sabbath and announced man’s new pronouncement of his eternal rest in God through Jesus’ Holy Sacrifice. St. Ignatius of Antioch, another early Church Doctor wrote, “Those who lived according to the old order of things have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord's Day, in which our life is blessed by him and by his death.”

This Sunday celebration of the Lord’s Day and the Eucharist, God’s human sacrifice at Calvary are at the very center of our Catholic faith. The idea of redeeming salvation and a new creation through the merits of the pain, suffering and death of Jesus Christ means so much to Catholics, and to their Church, that the Church makes it compulsory for every Catholic to attend Holy Mass on every Sunday in remembrance of it. It is the foundation and confirmation of all Catholic practice. If Catholics fail to attend Sunday Mass in commemoration of the new covenant with God (Jesus) then they do so under penalty of mortal (serious, grievous) sin.

Many customs changed for the early Christians as a result of what Jesus did for us on the Cross. In the Old Testament, is was common of newborn males to be circumcised as a sign of becoming a member of the chosen people of Israel. Jesus' life here on earth changed the rules to many practices and now Christians began to identify themselves through the practice of Baptism with water (in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit). These changes in traditions symbolized a new world order predicated in the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross.

I was then asked a followup question. “By what authority can the Church deem it appropriate to declare Sunday as a Holy day, a Sabbath day?” Immediately after Jesus’ death the Christians began to gather on Sundays to worship for reasons explained above. In addition, very early on, they were treated as outcasts by the Jews who prevented them from worshipping on Saturdays at the synagogues and temple. Soon after the Crucifixion, Christians found themselves persecuted, having to celebrate the Eucharist after dark in private homes under fear of discovery. When Jesus handed His authority over to Peter, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt. 16:19) Jesus gave the authority to change the old rule wherever His Church saw fit. As it was nowhere written in the Scriptures that the Sabbath had to be observed on Saturday it naturally and very quickly evolved to Sunday because of the special meaning the first day of the week now carried in the minds of all Christians.

As a side note, I once wondered why Catholics stand rather than kneel in certain parishes at certain points of the Mass, particularly at those points where the precious Body and Blood of Christ are elevated. I was of the opinion that kneeling is much more reverent than standing. In researching this question I soon realized the early Christians never knelt while attending Mass. The practice of kneeling was introduced many centuries later. The most reverent position at early Christian Mass was that of standing, because it reminded all who were in attendance of the resurrection, the new covenant forged by Jesus. I am now pleasantly reminded of this each time I attend Mass.

St. James and Mary, Our Blessed Mother, pray for our early Christian ancestors and as always, pray for us!

Ed

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), April 01, 2001

Answers

That's very interesting, Ed. I have been thinking about the ways we show respect in Mass, and how they relate to the customs of Catholics at that time. My guess is that the early Christians stood reverently to show respect. In the story of Exodus, God tells Moses to remove his sandals because where he stands is holy. And we still stand when the Gospel is read. Then maybe some king or emperor's court had everyone kneel, or bend their knees when they asked him for something. And the Catholics, of course, would not want to show more reverence for a man than for God, so they started kneeling in prayer. That's just my hypothesis. But it is interesting to think about.

Actually, the Sunday worship rule is great, but it only tells half the Catholic story. My priest is always pressuring people to go to Mass every day we can. He convinced me (I was completely against the idea at first), and it really does help focus your day around God.

-Hannah

-- Hannah (archiegoodwin_and_nerowolfe@hotmail.com), April 01, 2001.

Jmj

Thanks, Ed, for another one of your excellent essays on what is sometimes a controversial topic!
I only wish that you had concluded your work one paragraph earlier than you did. You see, someone has misled you (and thousands of other Latin Rite Catholics) about kneeling and standing at Mass. I will quote some of the statements you wrote, following them with my comments.

EL: "I once wondered why Catholics stand rather than kneel in certain parishes at certain points of the Mass, particularly at those points where the precious Body and Blood of Christ are elevated."

The reason for the difference in postures is that, with regard to the Church's liturgical law, some bishops and priests choose to be obedient, while others are defiantly disobedient (or inexcusably ignorant).

EL: "I was of the opinion that kneeling is much more reverent than standing."

This was not just an "opinion" of your mind, but something interior -- something known by your whole person. Jesus allowed people to assume a variety of postures in his presence without being offended -- so we can know that standing is not per se sinful. However, we know instinctively that "kneeling is much more reverent than standing," and this is reinforced by what the Church requires us to do. [More about that later.]

EL: "In researching this question I soon realized the early Christians never knelt while attending Mass. The practice of kneeling was introduced many centuries later. The most reverent position at early Christian Mass was that of standing, because it reminded all who were in attendance of the resurrection, the new covenant forged by Jesus."
It is true that kneeling is not the customary posture during the ancient liturgies of at least some of the Eastern Rites, but the reverence to God shown in other ways by the Easterns can put us Latins to shame. I don't have sufficient free time now to determine whether or not the historical information you presented is accurate with respect to the Latin Rite of the Church.

However, because of the widespread lack of faith (in certain "Catholic" circles) in the Real, Substantial Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, you must not fault me for suspecting that something sinister and unpleasant is operating here. What I am saying is that those most fervently pushing for no more kneeling at Mass may be acting, not from a desire to go back to ancient practices (which could be just their "pretext"), but rather from their being convinced that there is no reason to kneel. For them, Jesus is not present in the Blessed Sacrament! God is not on the altar to be adored by bending the knee!

I have no doubt that, from the days of Pentecost onward, kneeling must have been considered an appropriate posture for a Christian to adopt toward God. I say this because of what I see about postures in Sacred Scripture:

Isaiah 45:23 -- "By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: 'To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'"
Daniel 6:10 -- "... Daniel ... got down upon his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God ..."
2 Chronicles 6:13 -- "Solomon ... had made a bronze platform ... and he stood upon it. Then he knelt upon his knees in the presence of all the assembly of Israel, and spread forth his hands toward heaven, and said, 'O Lord, God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven or on earth, keeping covenant and showing steadfast love to thy servants who walk before thee with all their heart ... [etc.]'"
Ezra 9:5 -- "And at the evening sacrifice I ... fell upon my knees and spread out my hands to the Lord my God ..."
Psalm 95:6 -- "O come, let us worship and bow down, let us kneel before the Lord, our Maker!"
Acts 21:5 -- "... and kneeling down on the beach we prayed ..."
Mark 1:40 -- "And a leper came to him beseeching him, and kneeling said to him, 'If you will, you can make me clean.'"
Luke 17:15-16 -- "Then one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, praising God with a loud voice; and he fell on his face at Jesus' feet, giving him thanks.
Acts 10: 25-26 -- "When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. But Peter lifted him up, saying, 'Stand up; I too am a man.'" [This implies that kneeling to worship God is something St. Peter did.]
Romans 14:11 -- "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me ..."
Ephesians 3:14 -- "For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named ..."
Philippians 2:10 -- "... at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth." [If merely "at the name ... every knee should bow," how much more so is it fitting that we should kneel at the re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary to God the Father (at the time of consecration at Mass).]
Revelation 5:13-14 and 19:4 -- "And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all therein, saying, 'To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!' And the four living creatures said, 'Amen!' and the elders fell down and worshiped. ... And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who is seated on the throne, saying, 'Amen. Hallelujah!'" [These are most telling of all, since the Mass mirrors the perpetual "heavenly liturgy" that is described throughout Revelation. (See the new Scott Hahn book, "The Lamb's Supper -- the Mass as Heaven on Earth.")]

But let us assume, for the sake of argument, that kneeling was not common in the early centuries in the Latin Rite. The response is this: A desire to "turn back the clock" and do everything just as the first Christians did them is not the habit of the Church. The Mass is a "living" worship that has developed in various ways through the centuries. It is not for us (laity, priests, or individual bishops) to decide what practices or postures or prayers of the past should be revived. Such decisions on liturgical law are made by the pope and the bishops as a body (either at a Council or through changes voted upon by national/regional conferences and approved by the Holy See).

The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council deemed it wise to restore certain ancient practices to the liturgies, but they did not do away with kneeling in the Latin Rite Mass. In the front of the Sacramentary (the big book from which the priest reads at the altar), there is a special document called the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (G.I.R.M.), first published in 1970. In conjunction with the rubrics [instructions printed in red, sprinkled thoughout the actual Mass text], the G.I.R.M. provides the priest and congregation with the liturgical directives of the Church -- which are even, in a sense, more binding than Canon Law (since individual bishops can give dispensations from many canons, but not from the G.I.R.M.).

According to #21 of the G.I.R.M.: "... They [the congregation] should kneel at the consecration unless prevented by the lack of space, the number of people present, or some other good reason. But it is up to the conference of bishops to adapt the actions and postures described in the Order of the Roman Mass to the customs of the people. But the conference must make sure that such adaptations correspond to the meaning and character of each part of the celebration."

Consequently, Ed, it is seriously wrong for Latin Rite Catholics, throughout the world, NOT to kneel during the consecration (except when there are abnormal circumstances). And must a congregation kneel at any other time? That depends on whether or not the local conference of bishops, with Vatican approval, has decided "to adapt the actions and postures." I am not certain what the Canadian Bishops' Conference decided on this, but I have a good clue. When I attended Mass last year in two churches and in the cathedral of London, Ontario, the postures followed were identical to those followed in the U.S., as required by the adaptations approved by the U.S. bishops in 1970 (and since reaffirmed). I am referring to the fact that the congregation must kneel, not just during the consecration, but from the end of the "Holy, Holy, Holy" through the "Great Amen" at the end of the Eucharistic Prayer.

The words I quoted above from G.I.R.M. #21 are reiterated in #43 of the new 2000 edition of the G.I.R.M. (not yet translated from Latin into English). According to #43, everyone who is excused from kneeling "ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration" [according to the NCCB's unofficial translation.] Moreover, #43 says: "[W]here it is the custom that the people remain kneeling from the end of the Sanctus until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer, this [custom] is laudably retained."

Ed, you concluded: "I am now pleasantly reminded of this [early Christian standing, linked to the Resurrection] each time I attend Mass."
Ed, please do continue to be pleasantly reminded of the Resurrection each time you attend Mass. But please also do one of two things: ...
(1) kneel obediently, even though all others are standing, or
(2) attend Mass where the congregation shows obedience to the Church by kneeling.
Where improper standing is done (especially if it is in your territorial parish), please remind the pastor of his duty to follow the G.I.R.M., under pain of (potentially serious) sins of disobedience and bad example.

St. James, pray for us. Our Lady of Sorrows, pray for us.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), April 01, 2001.

John:

Let me begin by clarifying something I wrote earlier that may have given everyone the wrong impression. I am fully aware of the Church’s liturgical law for Catholics in the Latin rite where kneeling is recognized as the proper form of adoration at the consecration. When I said “those points (in the Mass) where the precious Body and Blood of Christ are elevated” I should have used the word “some” instead of “those”. It will set your mind at ease to know, that in this Diocese attendees at Mass, kneel at the consecration. In fact, I have never been at a Mass or even heard of one where the participants did not kneel at the consecration through the Eucharistic Prayer.

In our Diocese during the Communion Rite, at Mass, at the point where the Body and Blood of Jesus are elevated and the priest says, “Behold the Lamb of God....” some of our parishes are in a standing position and some of our parishes are in a kneeling position. I have been told by local priests that this has been left up to the local parish liturgical committee to decide which they prefer. It was this portion of the Mass that I was referring to when I made my comment earlier and not to the consecration.

While not necessarily proven to be correct, there is a modern belief among all faiths that kneeling is a much more reverent position than standing. This belief was borne out by yourself when you wrote it is “something interior, something known by your whole person”. This attitude you refer to could be a product of modern influences for I can assure you this was not the case immediately after the Resurrection. The modern Church is of the same mind as other Churches in the belief that kneeling is more reverent than standing. For the same reason we kneel at the consecration, other faiths purposely do not kneel believing that the bread and wine are merely symbols and to kneel would be tantamount to creating an act of idolatry since they feel, the bread and wine are not really the actual Body and Blood of the Saviour. So, many other faiths seem to agree with you. I can’t help but feel this is a primary reason the Church today insists that we kneel at the consecration, to affirm our belief in the Real Presence, in much the same way the early Christians differentiated themselves from the Jews through changes in rites such as circumcision/baptism, cessation of kosher practices etc. It is for this very reason I believe the early Christians began to stand instead of kneeling, in reverence at Eucharistic celebrations. In all other actions at Mass we stand as a corporate body in union with one another to pray, to sing, and to listen to the Word of God. Standing in this sense represents an act of unity in our love for God, an act of respect and love for one another. If the Church firmly believes that to kneel is the most reverent form of worship bar none, then why has the Church not taken the position that to kneel during the Gospel reading would be more reverent than standing. As Catholics we believe that Jesus is present in His Word. Would it not be more in keeping with this notion that kneeling is more reverent than standing, to kneel at the reading of the Gospel? This still does not necessarily mean that one is better than the other (kneeling vs. standing) at important moments of worship and adoration. It simply means we have to respect the wishes of the Church and kneel at the consecration for reasons they have outlined. I guess what matters is how one feels about worshipping the Creator and what is ultimately in one’s heart.

I disagree with you that “A desire to "turn back the clock" and do everything just as the first Christians did them is not the habit of the Church”. While “The Mass is a "living" worship that has developed in various ways through the centuries.” It is also true that many rites have been lost over time and the Church has demonstrated Her eagerness to reinstate as many as She can rediscover. This can be evidenced by the fact that after 1200 years of not offering the “prayers of the faithful” at Mass the Church re- instated this practice this past century after having discovered the practice was done at the celebration of early Christian Eucharistic Banquets and carried forward for 800 years until its discontinuation.

Your scriptural references to kneeling are well noted. However, there are also many scriptural references of praying while standing, arms extended. "I am that woman who stood before thee here praying to the Lord" (I Kings, 9:26). Of both the Pharisee and the publican it is stated in the parable that they stood to pray, the attitude being emphasized in the case of the former (Luke, 18:11,13). Christ assumes that standing would be the ordinary posture in prayer of those whom He addressed:" And when you shall stand to pray..." (Mark, 11:25). "And when ye pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites, that love to stand and pray in the synagogues..." (Matt. 6:5).

However, as I have mentioned earlier, a “new order” a “new beginning” a “new life” was entered into by the early Christians because of what Jesus did. “I make all things new” (Rev. 21:5) and the early Christians took this literally. Jesus Himself broke the rules and set the new standards when asked why His disciples were not fasting like John’s disciples were, He said, "Can the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. The days will come, when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.” (Mark 2:19) I am sure this “newness” had something to do with changing the Sabbath to Sunday. The “new era” the early Christians ushered in, saw an infusion of grace in them. It spawned the desire to differentiate themselves from those who had tortured and executed their Saviour.

Jesus re-wrote salvation history and Christians literally changed their practices overnight. Every Sunday was Easter Sunday. In fact the Church still regards each Sunday in the liturgical year as a “Little Easter”. Isn’t this why penitents are exempt from the lenten practices during lenten season on Sundays? It is because the Church recognizes the special meaning that Sunday holds for all of us and above everything else, Sundays are a time for jubilation and celebration. Italians, I believe to this day, still refer to the day of the week known as “Sunday” in their language as “pasquetta” which means "Little Easter". In patristic times, Sundays were celebrated on a EQUAL level with Easter Sunday! The Resurrection meant everything to the early Christians. This is why standing at worship replaced kneeling in public worship. They dared to be different than Christ’s executioners, their Jewish counterparts. It became more reverent to stand than to kneel! It became an affirmation of one’s love and commitment to Jesus Christ! Not to the Old Covenant, but to the new! It became a differentiation from former Jewish practices and sent a message that you had become a follower of the Lamb. Origen wrote,"The resurrection of the Lord is celebrated not only once a year but constantly every eight days"(Homilia in Isaiarn ). Eusebius similarly states: "While the Jews faithful to Moses, sacrificed the Passover lamb once a year . . . we men of the New Covenant celebrate every Sunday our Passover"(De solemnitate paschali).

John, in your research you no doubt will discover that Christians were FORBIDDEN to FAST and to KNEEL on Sundays. They were equally FORBIDDEN to FAST and to KNEEL during the seven-week Easter period because it was held to be EQUAL in significance to the Lord’s Day (Sunday) which was held in highest esteem above all other days. In “Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus” St. Irenaeus scolded early Christians not to kneel on Sundays and at Easter. His reason for doing this was that both feasts were symbols of the resurrection, the new beginning. The ecclesiastical writer Tertullian confirmed this custom as well when he wrote, “On Sunday it is unlawful to fast or to kneel while worshipping. We enjoy the same liberty from Easter to Pentecost." (treatise On Idolatry).

The practice of kneeling at the consecration was only adopted during the middle ages. Were the early Christians any less reverent for not kneeling at the consecration? I don’t think so. From what I have been given to understand, standing was there way of showing the highest degree of love, respect and adoration for the Eucharist. It would not surprise me to see changes in the practice of kneeling at Mass in coming years based on what the Church continues to learn of early Christian practices. In Her wisdom, I am sure the Church will determine that if any proposed changes demonstrate a more reverent way in which to worship and adore the Eucharist, then changes will be made. The only difference I will have if these changes come about is that I won’t be so opposed to them as I would have been a few years ago, in light of acquiring a better understanding of how the early Christians worshipped our Creator.

St. James and Mary, Our Blessed Mother, pray for us!

Ed

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), April 02, 2001.

In all these words I still may not have made myself clear about kneeling as a form of penance similar to fasting. The early Christians looked upon kneeling as a form of penance. That is why they were forbidden to kneel during the hightest feast days of Sundays and Easter. It was to be a joyous time of celebration and jubilation.

Ed

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), April 02, 2001.

Jmj

Well, Ed, I was very relieved to learn that there was a misunderstanding here that has now been cleared up. In your original message, you did not explain that kneeling does occur in your diocese when it is required, and (as you now realize) you instead left the impression that no kneeling occurs at all in some parish churces. I was happy to read that the facts are otherwise.

You will recall that, last time, I complimented you on your essay, but then said that I wished that you had left off the final paragraph, which distressed me so much. (As you can imagine, I spent a couple of hours assembling what turned out to be an unnecessary reply to it!) And now I must say, in similar fashion, that I wish you had stopped your reply to me after its FIRST paragraph, in which you reassured me that the correct posture is actually being taken in your church. I read the remainder of your message with sorrow and pain, partly because I suspect that you have been misled and partly because it seemed as though you had not read my message carefully. Let me try to explain what I mean.

EL: "I can't help but feel this is a primary reason the Church today insists that we kneel at the consecration, to affirm our belief in the Real Presence ..."
First, Ed, I must reprimand you for using the word, "insists." That is the kind of "loaded" word that a dissenter would use, not a humble person who would trust God to be guiding the leaders of the Church in these matters.
Second, while kneeling to affirm belief in the Real Substantial Presence would in itself be enough of a reason, I had explained last time that there is an even greater reason -- but you must have overlooked my words:
"If merely 'at the name ... every knee should bow,' how much more so is it fitting that we should kneel at the re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary to God the Father (at the time of consecration at Mass)."

EL: "If the Church firmly believes that to kneel is the most reverent form of worship bar none, then why has the Church not taken the position that to kneel during the Gospel reading would be more reverent than standing. As Catholics we believe that Jesus is present in His Word. Would it not be more in keeping with this notion that kneeling is more reverent than standing, to kneel at the reading of the Gospel?"
As Vatican II reminded us, Ed, Jesus "is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, not only in the person of His minister ... but especially under the eucharistic species. By His power He is present in the sacraments ... He is present in His word, since it is He Himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church. He is present, lastly, when the Church prays and sings ..."
The word translated, "especially," above, has elsewhere been translated, "par excellence." The Latin word is "maxime" -- literally, "in the greatest way." As I said earlier, though we kneel at the consecration particularly because we are being permitted to be mystically present at Calvary, we are also kneeling in humility before the King of Kings, truly present. Before today, I had heard the flawed argument you have offered ["then why not kneel during the reading of the gospel too?"] only from dissenters, and it makes me so sad to see it again. There is simply no comparison between the two modes of "being present" -- the Eucharist and the Scriptures. As an analogy, consider which would evoke more of a response from a person -- reading a letter from Jesus or seeing his face and shaking his hand. Each would be a mode of being "present," but, oh, what a mode the second would be! And so we regard and react differently at Mass to the "presence" of Jesus in written word and Blessed Sacrament.

EL: "It is also true that many rites have been lost over time and the Church has demonstrated Her eagerness to reinstate as many as She can rediscover. This can be evidenced by the fact that after 1200 years of not offering the 'prayers of the faithful' at Mass the Church re-instated this practice."
But, Ed, why are you mentioning this? I had already stated much the same thing in my message -- but again you seem not to have taken note of it. I wrote, "The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council deemed it wise to restore certain ancient practices to the liturgies ... ." For decades prior to the Council, the ancient liturgies had been researched, resulting in a variety of restorations being done after 1965 (as well as removal of unsupportable accretions). I then went on to say, "... but they [the Fathers of Vatican II] did not do away with kneeling in the Latin Rite Mass." They could have done so, but they did not. I completely disagree with your statement that "the Church has demonstrated Her eagerness to reinstate as many [lost rites] as She can rediscover." Although I cannot present any quotations to you, I believe that the Vatican has repudiated that false notion by stating that NOT ALL ancient practices are appropriate to our time. The Latin-Rite Mass is "living" and cannot be turned back into looking exactly as it once did. To think that it can be turned back would be to require that only Latin be used, that there be no use of the organ, etc.. No, my friend, you are quite mistaken.

EL: "Your scriptural references to kneeling are well noted. However, there are also many scriptural references of praying while standing, arms extended."
But, Ed, I knew that. I never said that there was a lack of such references. My job was not to show that standing is bad. (Indeed, I said that standing is NOT sinful per se and that it is the predominant posture in the East.) No. My job was to show that kneeling is not bad, that it IS acceptable, fitting and proper. There was no need for you to defend standing by quoting from the scriptures or the Fathers, since I had not attacked it. I, on the other hand, HAD to quote, because, whether you intended to or not, you had left the implication that kneeling was a second-millennium innovation and might be a bad idea that ought to be displaced.

EL: "I have mentioned earlier, a 'new order' a 'new beginning' a 'new life' was entered into by the early Christians because of what Jesus did. 'I make all things new' (Rev. 21:5) and the early Christians took this literally."
But, Ed, you are implying that I was simply trying to press Old Testament Jewish kneeling practices on Christianity, and you are trying to say that these were repudiated. Blimey! Did you not see all the NEW Testament quotations I gave concerning the appropriateness of Christian kneeling and even falling prostrate -- most particularly the prostrations that occur at the heavenly liturgy into which we are placing ourselves when we attend Mass?"

EL: "John, in your research you no doubt will discover that Christians were FORBIDDEN to FAST and to KNEEL on Sundays. ... The early Christians looked upon kneeling as a form of penance."
But, Ed, I will not be doing any research on this, and, if I should happen to come across such facts in passing, they will not influence me, because I trust the successors of the Apostles. Christians today do NOT look upon kneeling exclusively as a form of penance (and I doubt that your statement about this is correct anyway). Kneeling has a wider range of meanings now, so the practices of early Christians, if based on a narrow meaning [penance], are not be appropriate today -- just as recent popes and their fellow bishops have decided. I will resist all temptations to play the amateur sleuth and to start trying to figure out doctrines and appropriate disciplines on my own, potentially resulting in my second-guessing the Magisterium (as if I were a Protestant).

EL: "It would not surprise me to see changes in the practice of kneeling at Mass in coming years based on what the Church continues to learn of early Christian practices."
The Church is more concerned about the present than the past, Ed. In the present age, the Church realizes that there is need for still greater reverence and enhancement of faith (replacing the doubt and outright denial that is too evident). I am confident that, if any posture changes do occur in our lifetimes, they will include MORE kneeling, not less -- regardless of what is found in early Christian sources (which are likely to yield nothing further anyway). Since a new G.I.R.M. just came out last year, Ed, it is probable that we will be dead (or barely alive) when the next G.I.R.M. is published, so please don't hold your breath waiting for a chance to stand more!

I'm beginning to wonder which have been worse: (1) the taxing battles we had to wage against a torrent of anti-Catholics from November through February or (2) the unexpected bickering and fiercely unbending stances taken by several good Catholics that I have had to face in March and April. The first series of battles too often made me furious. The second series are making me depressed, and I wish that they could end.

St. James, pray for us. Our Lady of Sorrows, pray for us.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@des.dla.mil), April 02, 2001.

JFG,

Your last post couldn't be more incorrect! Evidence from the early Christians (notably St. Clement 1 & St. Evaristus) *clearly* indicate the most sincere form of worship was either performed while sitting, or in some cases lying supine. Please check your sources before posting this type of incorrect information again.

Frank

P.S. A cheery, if late, "Ayprel phouls". Faith JFG, Adversity will only make you stronger.

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 03, 2001.

Tsk, Frank! And I expected more from you. Lolling about in a sauna is well known to be the form of worship that early Christians enjoyed the best. Those stone catacombs would get nice and toasty when they poured on the steaming water.

-Hannah

Aepryl phules back to you.

-- Hannah (archiegoodwin_and_nerowolfe@hotmail.com), April 03, 2001.

You rat, Frank! You really had me going there for about five seconds.
JFG

-- (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), April 03, 2001.

Hannah,

You've got me wondering about that. My impression of the early Christians was that they went to the catacombs to escape persectution, OTOH a bunch of folks sitting around in togas for the sauna is a MUCH more appealing picture :-).

Happy Palm Sunday (one of my favorite days of the year) to you and yours,

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 04, 2001.