Los Angeles Times Front Page Story: A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won't Stand for It
"For every knee shall be bowed to Me" (Isaiah 45:24)
"Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Phil 2:9-11).
Well, the story has made the front page of the Los Angeles Times: A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won't Stand for It
Quote:
"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.
After reading the Open Letter To Bishop Brown, it's not all that hard to understand why he cannot abide kneeling.
This quote caused me some concern:
At the center of the controversy is the church's concept of Christ, said Jesuit Father Lawrence J. Madden, director of the Georgetown Center for Liturgy at Georgetown University in Washington. It's a question raised in the bestselling book "The Da Vinci Code."Because the earliest Christians viewed Jesus as God and man, Madden said, they generally stood during worship services to show reverence and equality. About the 7th century, however, Catholic theologians put more emphasis on Christ's divinity and introduced kneeling as the only appropriate posture at points in the Mass when God was believed to be present.
Quick, someone get Fr. Madden a Bible! The Acts of the Apostles tells us how Saint Peter (9:40), Saint Paul (20:36), and the whole Christian community (21:5) pray on their knees.
And what is implied by referring to "when God was believed to be present"?
"If anyone says that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist the only-begotten Son of God is not to be adored even outwardly with the worship of latria (the act of adoration), ...and that the adorers of it are idolaters; let him be anathema." (Enchiridion Symbolorum, Denzinger, 30th edition, Number 888, p. 271).
"It was in the flesh that Christ walked among us and it is His flesh that He has given us to eat for our salvation. But,’ he added: ‘no one eats of this flesh without having first adored it . . . and not only do we not sin in thus adoring it, but we would be sinning if we did not do so!” (St. Augustine, On the Psalms, 98:9, in Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei , No. 55, p. 323)
Pope Pius XII's encyclical on the Sacred Liturgy, Mediator Dei, tells us that:
"Outward acts of religion... serve to foster piety, to kindle the flame of charity, to increase our faith and deepen our devotion." "They make it possible to tell genuine Christians from their false or heretical counterparts." Furthermore, Pope Pius XII said, "It is therefore the keen desire of the Church that all of the faithful kneel at the feet of the Redeemer to tell Him how much they venerate and love Him."
Pope Benedict XVI on kneeling:
"Here the bodily gesture attains the status of a confession of faith in Christ: words could not replace such a confession." (Pope Benedict XVI, The Feast of Faith, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986, pp. 74-75).
“There are groups, of no small influence, who are trying to talk us out of kneeling" (Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 184).
In the same book, Pope Benedict XVI utilizes Sacred Scripture and, specifically, the example of Christ himself in the Garden of Gethsemane, to demonstrate that any attempts to promote the absence of kneeling in worship is not in keeping with tradition.
"Kneeling does not come from any culture - it comes from the Bible and its knowledge of God" (p. 185).
More from the same work on kneeling:
"There is much more that we might add. For example, there is the touching story told by Eusebius in his history of the Church as a tradition going back to Hegesippus in the second century. Apparently, Saint James, the "brother of the Lord", the first bishop of Jerusalem and "head" of the Jewish Christian Church, had a kind of callous on his knees, because he was always on his knees worshipping God and begging forgiveness for his people (2, 23, 6). Again, there is a story that comes from the sayings of the Desert Fathers, according to which the devil was compelled by God to show himself to a certain Abba Apollo. He looked black and ugly, with frighteningly thin limbs, but most strikingly, he had no knees. The inability to kneel is seen as the very essence of the diabolical."
Pope John Paul II was often photographed kneeling:
This is interesting. Look who's kneeling here:




When will the Holy Father put a stop to this nonsense and clean out the filthy California bishops. Please send us an Olmsted or a Finn. Why must we suffer so long.
Posted by: imagodei | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 03:00 PM
On kneeling in the Acts, there's also ch 7 verses 59 and 60:
59 And they stoned Stephen, invoking, and saying: Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. 60 And falling on his knees, he cried with a loud voice, saying: Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.
Our Lord also knelt while praying: Luke ch 22, verse 41
Posted by: chattr | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 03:31 PM
This is outrageous! Look at the fruits of collegiality! Loopholes to destroy reverential acts to the Blessed Sacrament!
Catholics have a duty to not financially support this evil! Send your hard earned donations to support truly Catholic Bishops and Institutions! Shame on Bishop Tod Brown!
Posted by: Sending my donations elsewhere! | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 06:06 PM
I read the newspaper and my jaw dropped! Mortal Sin to kneel! This lunacy has totally exposed the corruption behind the scandals! Bishop Brown my friend was molested by individuals from your Diocese. You should be begging the people to kneel in reparation for the grave injustice, hoisted upon innocent children. Instead you label the people who want to kneel, mortal sinners. If kneeling is a mortal sin, what sin is it, for a Catholic Bishop to defy Church Teaching and support Homosexual domestic partnership?
Posted by: Katherine | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 06:17 PM
I am saddened to report that Bishop Tod Brown had the same reputation in Idaho. People need to pray for this Bishop's soul!
The priest at St. Mary's is under obedience to this bad Bishop! I read where the priest Father Tran has said that women should be ordained priests. Isn't that disobedience?
Posted by: Thomas | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 06:25 PM
most kids who attend the Catholic schools in the diocese of Orange probably have never heard of mortal sin. Looks like they've gotten a crash course from Bishop Brown and Fr. Tran on it though. Homosexual acts? No. Publicly supporting abortion? No. Priests living with male lovers? Absolutely not. No,children. It's kneeling after the Agnus Dei at Mass. That is a mortal sin.
Posted by: Rita | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 06:55 PM
I think every Catholic in Bishop Brown's diocese should make a point to kneel as a protest against him (not to mention that it is difficult to understand how kneeling in the presence of Jesus is somehow considered offensive). Bishop Brown used to be in Idaho and most people are delighted he is gone.
Posted by: fedup | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 09:07 PM
You know....
There *IS* a papal nuncio in Washington, DC - the Pope's ambassador.
Although as Catholics we don't think of the Church as something to lobby, writing to him and perhaps enclosing copies of this article may help to "whisper it in the ear" of the very man who wrote:
“There are groups, of no small influence, who are trying to talk us out of kneeling" (Spirit of the Liturgy, p. 184).
Archbishop Pietro Sambi
Embassy Apostolic Nunciature, the Holy See
3339 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington DC 20008
Maybe it will work, maybe it won't do much... I suspect B16 doesn't follow this blog though....
Posted by: A Simple Sinner | Monday, May 29, 2006 at 11:56 PM
Does anybody have the hard proof that Father Tran said those who kneel at the Angus Dei commit a " mortal sin" . I think those knocking Father Tran and Bishop Brown should produce the document where Father Tran said it was a " mortal sin". The GIRM allows a bishop to insist that his flock stand during the Agnus Dei. For those at St. Mary's who say they has a custom of kneel at that point under Father Johnson are no better than the Jesuits at LMU who say it is okay to stand during the consecration at their college. I pray both sides can calm down and think before making their next move.
Posted by: Vincent | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:00 AM
Vincent, The hard proof is that it was printed in the parish bulletin! How is that for evidence? Stop judging the situation, when you are not aware of the facts. Many priests are shocked that Bishop Brown used this poor priest to tell people they are in mortal sin for kneeling! Bishop Brown allows standing at the Consecration and some parishes get to still kneel. Vincent you are just as wonderful as Bishop Brown at persecuting people who want to Adore God.
Posted by: No Armchairr Quarterbacks | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:47 AM
Dear Armchair,
Please produce this bullentin. Have you actually see it with your only eyes. You can't believe everything you read on the LA Times. What about the reputation of Father TRan and bishop Brown ? Why so fast to trash their names? I thought as Catholics we believed in charity in all things?
Posted by: Vincent | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 01:09 AM
Yes, I have seen it Thomas! Why are you so doubting? They were all over the internet! Where have you been? A letter was also posted from Cardinal Arinze that was written to a woman in Kentucky who asked if she could kneel. He said "While common postures are good, DO NOT TAKE AWAY THE RIGHT OF A CATHOLIC TO KNEEL DOWN AND ADORE JESUS"! Rome has spoken Vincent! Don't you want to kneel? The only trashing of Bishop Brown was self induced when he sent out a memo to all priests in the Diocese of Orange, supporting homosexual domestic partnership. He is defying God and Rome, Vincent! Father Tran is only carrying out orders from his superior. Everyone understands this. He has to. Father Tran did state that he is in favor of women's ordination to the priesthood! Who sounds like your Jesuit comparison now? I would never venture criticism, without checking out the facts. That is the charitable way to blog!
Posted by: No Armchair Quarterbacks | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 01:33 AM
Vincent,
The bulletin does exist. Would you suddenly have a change of heart if you saw it for yourself? Fr.Tran and Bishop Brown have very openly scandalized themselves with their heretical statements regarding support for women priests, and for homosexual domestic partnerships, resp. Yet, they demand obedience to their agenda. Bishop Brown wants tabernacles out of Churches, has been so irritated by kneeling, that he yanked a woman from her knees to receive Communion standing, and now has told people through Fr. Tran that it's a mortal sin to kneel after the Agnus Dei. Tolerance of evil is not charity.
Posted by: Dean | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 01:51 AM
The Devil has no knees.
Posted by: Milly the Millstone | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 02:32 AM
I haven't heard anything about, ' Let's
leave all this up for one's conscience to
decide! ', is that still something of a slang, nowadays? Have certain personages
in the Church come to regard the law of
Christ as something more important to trust
than one's conscience? Or, does all the
grabage of what this ' conscience ' agenda
was meant to protect become passe, or
irrelevant since it all has hit the fan
over the years, in America?
Posted by: Robert | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 02:47 AM
I cannot believe that people on this blog are so quick to believe a angry group on parishoners who trash Father Tran. Somebody give me the link or person to contact to see this bullentin for myself. Secound we have no offical statement that Father Tran supports women ordination. Only the words of an angry few. Finally And I think most important Bishop Brown has the right to insist that people stand from the Agnus Dei until they recieve Holy Communion per the GIRM ( General Instruction of the Roman Missal). Don't get me wrong I fight against lay people giving homlies and liturical dancing in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. I just think that charity requires that this situation be handled more humbly. Like going to the bishop instead of running to the LA Times and writing an open letter to Bishop Brown. Did anyone here actually read the LA Times atricle trying to connect kneeling with the DA Vinci Code. I have read this groups Flyer which basically attacks Father Tran and condems him on Hearsay. I will galdy step down once somebody directs me to Father Trans statement that those who kneel at the Agnus Dei Commit mortal sin.
Posted by: Vincent | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 05:40 AM
I’m with Vincent on this one. I think it is imprudent for the parishioners to be handling their disappointment in this manner. I think what the priest is saying is that it is sinful to be disobedient and on something that is not a matter of morals, it is, if you’re disobeying out of contempt. (Now, don’t get me wrong, I’ve wondered if Tod Brown believes in mortal sin, but he knows these parishioners do.)
Standing at the Lamb of God is not immoral and it is up to the Bishop what we do at this point in the mass. I could argue standing is a sign of respect. If I got to have say in the matter, I would vote for kneeling, but since someone who has legitimate authority says stand, I would do it and like the old man says at the end of the article, tell Jesus I’m kneeling in my heart.
I’ve met and spoken with Fr. Tran on other matters and he is not a bad man and I know some of these parishioners and they are great people. I think both sides are making an issue out of something that should not be an issue. They should quietly kneel and the priest should let them. But if they are asked to get up, they should. I just don’t think this is something anyone should be falling on their sword over.
I pray for unity in the Church in my daily rosary.
Posted by: carolg | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 10:42 AM
I sincerely hope, since the pastor and the diocesan spokesperson are both quoted referring to the disobedience of kneeling as a mortal sin, that the diocese will demand a correction or otherwise post a public statement that it is not a mortal sin. Otherwise all readers can assume is that the newspaper account is true.
Posted by: Patrick Kinsale | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 11:13 AM
Vincent,
Can I have your email address so I can send you a copy of the parish bulletin?
Posted by: St. Toribio Romo | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:22 PM
If anybody else wants a copy of that bulletin, email me at fguido17@yahoo.com
Posted by: St. Toribio Romo | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:23 PM
But The Saints Always Obeyed!
This objection, as we will see, is rooted in a simplistic understanding of Church teaching mixed with ignorance of Church history.
Sacred Scripture makes it clear that priests and bishops must be publicly corrected when two or three witnesses concur:
"Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning." (1 Timothy 5:19-20)
Moreover, according to St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica, (ST II-II.33.4 ad 2) we have the duty to rebuke our prelate if he commits a fault.
Yet some claim that we must obey our leaders no matter what they demand of us, and that to voice the slightest disagreement with them is a manifestation of disrespect and disobedience. Not only is this way of thinking incorrect, it also paralyzes Catholics into inaction and heightens their confusion. It is absolutely depressing that so many Catholics are so poorly catechized, but still think they know the faith, and the one element they remember (and incorrectly apply) is that we must obey superiors (and keep giving them lots of money). People seem to have muddled understandings of what they read in the Lives of the Saints as children and fantasize that obedience to disobedient bishops and priests makes them holy like the saints.
Did the saints always obey? Consider the following: “Disobedient” Saints
Saint Athanasius the Great, Doctor of the Church
Labeled Disobedient for: Called Pope Liberius to task for the Arian heresy. He was excommunicated for his disobedience.
Saint Thomas Moore, knight, Lord Chancellor of England, author, and martyr
Labeled Disobedient for: He was martyred when he did not follow the majority of the English clergy, including all but one of their bishops, out of the Church.
Saint John Fisher, Cardinal, Bishop of Rochester, and martyr
Labeled Disobedient for: He refused to obey Archbishop Cranmer, who had ordered all priests and religious to condone the marriage of Henry VIII to Anne Boleyn. He was also martyred.
Saint Catherine of Siena, Dominican Tertiary,Doctor of the Church
Labeled Disobedient for: She was publicly critical of cardinals and told Pope Gregory XI to go back to Rome.
Saint Joan of Arc, martyr and Patroness of France
Labeled Disobedient for: Disobeyed her bishop, who wanted her to deny her locutions, and was consequently burned at the stake.
Saint Therese of Lisieux, Doctor of the Church
Labeled Disobedient for: She disobeyed her bishop, who had told her not to disturb the Pope by requesting permission to enter the Carmelite Convent at her young age.
Saint John of the Cross, Mystical Doctor and founder of the Discalced Carmelites
Labeled Disobedient for: He disobeyed his religious superiors and was beaten and imprisoned by members of his own order.
Saint John Bosco
Labeled Disobedient for: He disobeyed his bishop, who attempted to seek control of Saint John’s newly formed religious order, but instead Saint John made a personal appeal to the Pope.
Saint Bruno,
Saint Hugh of Grenoble,and
Saint Godfrey of Amiens
Labeled Disobedient for: Due to the agreements between Pope Paschal II and Henry V, Emperor of Germany, these saints stated at the Council of Reims that unless Pope Paschal II revoked his agreement with the Emperor, “we should be obliged to withdraw our allegiance from you.”
Posted by: St. Toribio Romo | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:34 PM
I find this quite upsetting, what can this be attributed to? I do know that no one kneels anymore to receive our Lord after the changes of Vatican II, maybe we need to revisit some of these changes that were made, as one who sees the lack of reverence, and kneeling shows reverence, that takes place today in the worship of our Lord, it makes me question what is behind all of this. As a professional, I would want those to go above and beyond my requirements-whny is it that the Bishops and clergy are demanding LESS? Are they truly elected by the Holy Spirit or fallen men?
Posted by: Jack | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:52 PM
A couple from St. Mary's, who are in their eighties, spoke with Father Tran after they read the bulletin. They asked him point blank...Do you mean to tell us we are in Mortal Sin for kneeling?
Father Tran said, "If you kneel down accidently, no..but if you kneel down on purpose, yes!"
The couple said "Of course were kneeling on purpose to adore God!"
What nonsense! Fr. Tran is flat out wrong! A mortal sin requires serious matter, sufficient reflection, and full consent!
Kneeling after the Agnus Dei, as Catholics have done for centuries, is not a serious matter. Moreover, Catholics have assurances from Cardinal Arinze that they have the right to kneel to adore God during the various parts of the Mass.
I am always saddened when people who have not been involved, or suffered greatly for standing up for the truth, think they have a handle on all of the facts. They do more to damage truth than had they just prayed!
Father John Hardon S.J. who was asked by Pope Paul VI, to write an English Catechism to fill the void until the Church could put together the Catechism after the Second Vatican Council stated, "Unless we recover the zeal and the spirit of the first century Christians-unless we are willing to do what they did and to pay the price that they paid, the future of our country, the days of America are numbered."
How foolish to think that Catholics at St. Mary's by the Sea are hanging their swords on this issue. After enumerating the list of terrible things Bishop Brown has done to our Diocese, since his arrival in 1998, as the Open Letter To Bishop Brown (linked in the original post) has done, it is incredible, that anyone could be so obtuse as to claim that people are hanging their sword on this issue. This is not the issue upon which people are hanging their swords, this is the straw that broke the camels back!
Posted by: Maria | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 12:59 PM
St. Romo,
My email address is vince26@sbcglobal.net. Thank you very much for any information you can provide.
Posted by: Vincent | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 02:01 PM
carolg,
I am not in doubt of your good intentions, yet, what you have written is, in essence, an expression of support for Bishop Brown and Fr. Tran, and a condemnation of Catholics whose actions you admit that you support in your heart.
Why the disconnect?
Don't you realize that the people you have sort of stabbed in the back with your comment are on your team?
It is fine that you don't want to be confrontational; not everyone can take on that role. However, it is quite another thing to accuse those who are willing to call Bishop Brown out over this issue (and a plethora of other issues) of being bad Catholics, while setting yourself up, as someone who is new to the situation, as being not only "in the know" but as having the correct attitude about the matter.
I trust that you have read the open letter to Bishop Brown linked in the post that begins this thread in its entirety. i am confident that you have checked out the links. I am confident that those you know who have connections within the Diocese can assure you that the complaints addressed in the open letter, however effectively presented, are, in fact, the truth. I trust, therefore, that you are well aware of Bishop Brown's credentials as a die-hard liberal. (He may be the legitimate authority, but is is only because he has succeeded in duping those who gave his authority. He is a legitimate homosexual activist and there is ample evidence that strongly suggests that he is not in possession of the legitimate Catholic faith.)
Why, then, knowing all of these things, would you work against those who are trying to oppose a bishop whose principal goal is to snuff out all vestigial remnants of traditional Catholicism within his diocese and replace the Christ of Sacred Scripture and Holy Tradition with a counterfeit made in his own image and likeness?
While it is true that not all people are gifted with the ability to express things as we might want to say them, it might be nice if we could all recognize that it is in no way helpful to publicly castigate those who are, in reality, on our own team.
Love him, or not, Ronald Reagan's philosophy was to never speak ill of another Republican. I think there is wisdom there.
If, after reflecting upon these things, you still find the Catholics at St. Mary's who love to kneel at a time that Catholics have knelt during Holy Mass for centuries (and that includes most of the saints we pray to for intercession), wholly repellent to all but your heart's sentiments, consider this:
I am reminded of a quote about the holocaust that I heard some twenty years ago:
"When they came for the Jews, I said nothing, because I wasn't a Jew. When they came for the gypsies, I said nothing, because I wasn't a gypsy. When they came for the Catholics, I said nothing, because I wasn't a Catholic. When they came for me, there was no one left to say anything."
Please Carol, reconsider your lack of support for those who are exposing legitimate evil.
Posted by: john chrysostom | Tuesday, May 30, 2006 at 02:39 PM