CNA Staff, Dec 23, 2025 / 16:55 pm (CNA).
Priests as well as the lay faithful are voicing criticisms after Bishop Michael Martin of the Diocese of Charlotte, North Carolina, issued a pastoral letter last week prohibiting the use of altar rails and kneelers in the reception of Communion in the diocese.
In the Dec. 17 letter, Martin said that by Jan. 16, 2026, the use of altar rails, kneelers, and prie-dieus (movable kneelers) will no longer be permitted in the diocese, and any “temporary or movable fixtures used for kneeling for the reception of Communion” must be removed.
In the letter, Martin said while an “individual member of the faithful” is free to kneel to receive and should not be denied Communion, the “normative posture for all the faithful in the United States is standing,” per guidelines from the U.S. bishops.
In May, a leaked draft of a letter detailed Martin’s intended reforms of traditional practices in the diocese. In the letter, the bishop said that because “there is no mention in the conciliar documents, the reform of the liturgy, or current liturgical documents concerning the use of altar rails or kneelers for the distribution of holy Communion, they are not to be employed in the Diocese of Charlotte.”
Also in the May letter, Martin said it was “simply absurd” to suggest that “kneeling is more reverent than standing.”
Martin said in his Dec.17 letter that it is his “intention to continue to facilitate ‘peace and unity’ in our liturgies.”
A Charlotte priest who spoke to CNA on the condition of anonymity said of Martin’s “heavy-handed” approach to reform: “Everybody’s had it.”
“If the priests of the diocese were asked for a vote of no confidence, a vast majority would vote that way,” he said.
“Unfortunately, Bishop Martin’s style of leadership has been a source of division for the diocese since his arrival and there does not seem to be any course correction after many appeals. It has been painful for many across the diocese,” he continued.
“Why is kneeling a problem? Why go to such lengths to force these changes?” he asked. Receiving communion is “the most intimate moment of the week for people, who are receiving their God. Why go through all this bad PR? I don’t understand it.”
“It’s going to be a train wreck,” he continued, speaking of the continued opposition to the bishop’s reforms.
He told CNA he is hopeful the matter will be addressed at the upcoming consistory of cardinals in Rome.
A letter by an anonymous canon lawyer also began circulating last week throughout the Charlotte Diocese in response to Martin’s Dec. 17 letter.
In the anonymous letter, Martin is accused of ignoring the role of synodality in his decision-making. He is also accused of ignoring the feedback of his presbyteral council.
Writing to Martin, the letter-writer told him that the “decision to prohibit altar rails and aids to kneeling relies on your own preference rather than the law or the tradition of the Church.”
Matthew Hazell, a British liturgy scholar, told the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, in May that Martin’s perspective was consistent with what Pope Benedict XVI famously described as a “hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture.”
“Rather than allow the novus ordo to be celebrated in a manner in keeping with its own rubrics and with the Church’s tradition, Bishop Martin seems to see it as an entirely new creation that cannot even be seen to have anything in common with what came before,” Hazell told the Register.
Parishes that kneel reportedly provide lion’s share of vocations
According to Brian Williams, an advocate for Charlotte’s Traditional Latin Mass community, of the diocese’s 44 seminarians, “at least 75% are from parishes where kneeling has been the practice to receive holy Communion.”
Williams said his small parish, where kneeling is the norm, has produced seven seminarians recently.
He told CNA that the ”mega parishes that have embraced these liturgical changes” have provided “maybe two of the 44 seminarians even though they account for tens of thousands of families.”
One of the largest Catholic parishes in the country, St. Matthew Catholic Church, does not have altar rails. Willliams said there is “one seminarian from there right now, and not more than six men ordained from there in its entire history.”
“They do a lot of great things, but they’re not providing vocations,” Williams said.
In September, despite a great deal of pushback, Martin canceled the Traditional Latin Mass in all but one small chapel that is not large enough to house the diocese’s burgeoning Latin Mass community.
He initially tried to cancel the Mass several months earlier than the timeline set by his predecessor, Bishop Peter Jugis, but decided in the summer to allow the Mass to continue.
“It falls to every member of the body of Christ to facilitate unity in our celebrations. These norms for our diocese move us together toward the Church’s vision for the fuller and more active participation of the faithful, especially emphasized by our Holy Father, Pope Leo XIV, at the beginning of his Petrine ministry,” Martin wrote in the December letter.
In the May letter, Martin described how priestly vestments with too much lace or decoration would be prohibited in the diocese. That letter also decried the use of Latin in any Masses other than ones in which most of the attendees understand Latin, such as “a specific gathering of scholars, clergy, or those trained in classical music.”
Martin said pastors who incorporate Latin into their Masses are not being “pastorally sensitive,” writing that “the faithful’s full, conscious, and active participation is hindered wherever Latin is employed.”
“Most of our faithful do not understand and will never comprehend the Latin language, especially those on the periphery. It is fallacious to think that if we employ Latin more frequently, the faithful will get used to it and finally understand it,” he claimed.
When Martin concelebrated the Mass with several other bishops this summer at a parish that traditionally kneels at an altar rail to receive, per his direction, Communion was distributed in front of the altar rail to discourage parishioners from kneeling.
Nevertheless, a video showed parishioners kneeling anyway, many of them elderly women who needed assistance standing up after receiving.
The Diocese of Charlotte declined multiple requests for comment.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
It sounds like “Bishop” Martin is in the running to become a Protestant. Running roughshod over what the people would like to do in a respectful way at Mass is a demonstration of intolerance, not leadership. The church is not a democracy, but neither has it been a dictatorship. Clerics like this serve neither the church nor it’s people well. The Bishop should worry less about lace and more about the souls of his diocese. Vote with the collection plate, folks. Its likely the only way to get his attention.
He’s not alone. Some are “Alphabet” activists, almost all pre-occupied with legitimizing invasion.
To use a Catholic word, NOT a “shepherd.”
Instead: an infantalized tyrant.
Yes. I am in the Diocese and it is most upsetting. If he keeps it up I’ll have to go to the nearby Ordinariate. Our diocese has had an incredible number of pious young seminarians. I fear his actions will dampen their enthusiasm.
It sounds like “Bishop” Martin is in the running to become a Cardinal.
“Why is kneeling a problem? Why go to such lengths to force these changes?” he asked. Receiving communion is “the most intimate moment of the week for people, who are receiving their God.”
To kneel before the Chalice is to say “I believe in the supremacy of God and in His real presence there, in the Chalice” (I am not saying that those who do not kneel have different feelings). It is about the relationship of a soul and Christ. Indeed, it is very intimate. To prohibit a person to receive Holy Communion in a way which he feels is the most appropriate (pious) expression of his faith/relationship with God is to engage in a soul’s violation.
Obviously, the Church should see that behavior before the Chalice is respectful of Our Lord. However, genuflecting/prostration and then standing, bowing down, kneeling are all respectful and even more, they have been approved by the Church and practiced by believers for centuries. Hence what we have now is nothing else but a violation of a human person, of the sacredness of her intimate relationship with God – and of the Church’s norms.
It is also a sin against God. Those who are insisting on “no kneeling” are making themselves bigger than God. They are attempting to reduce” God’s supremacy” (being visible in the attitude of believers to the Holy Communion) for the sake of achieving some “unity”. This vector has its natural end in “banishing God from the Church altogether” making Him invisible, for the sake of “unity”.
I am not at all against kneeling for reception, but I do see that needless problems resulting in trying to accommodate for different ways of receiving in the same mass. Some people up, some down, some on tongue, some in hand etc, etc. It can be very awkward for both priest and those receiving. It breaks up the oneness of the forgiven unworthies into the pious and the less pious. We need to be an anonymous line of people approaching the sacrament. People are people , and as people we tend to judge those who are different. “Who does she think SHE is kneeling with her head covered ?”” She can’t even control her own children etc.”etc. “ Or “ How can THEY accept the Blessed Sacrament standing in the hand?” “How irreverent “ etc. etc. In this situation uniformly is a positive and anonymity an imperative . An understanding pastor could accommodate those who had certain preferences at a different mass or recommend that they attend a neighboring church which could accommodate them. I truly believe that every effort should be made in every diocese to accommodate the Latin mass; but that these congregations should acknowledge the full validity of the NO mass and the Vatican II Council. Different but equal.
“I am not at all against kneeling for reception, but I do see that needless problems resulting in trying to accommodate for different ways of receiving in the same mass. Some people up, some down, some on tongue, some in hand etc, etc. It can be very awkward for both priest and those receiving. It breaks up the oneness of the forgiven unworthies into the pious and the less pious.”
And let’s not forget that kneeling might add a few seconds to the act of reception, and if there’s enough people attempting to kneel, that might add a few minutes to Mass, delaying the desperate race out of the parking lot and the rush to the store and to the couch. Sportsball is on and I have bets online bets! Big Box store has a sale!
And of course we need not care much about the person who might be suffering from the tremors of Parkinsons Disease or other infirmities that induce ataxia or dyskinesia and who might fear dropping the host.
And finally, do not appear too pious or reverent.
It’s amnazing how some people think that Utopia is just around the corner from enforced conformity.
A communion rail accommodates every method of reception without any problems. As a side benefit, it’s much harder to observe everyone else’s posture when they are directly to your right and left, as opposed to directly in front of you.
At any rate, I promise you, people who are on the lookout for differences to judge others by, will not stop just because everyone is unjustly forced into the same posture for receiving Holy Communion. The proper response to this is a homily (or 7) regarding the sins of rash judgement, detraction, calumny, gossip, etc. That is not just because I think people should be allowed to kneel, but also because spiritual problems are not solved by making everyone else accommodate themselves to the problem (South African parishes used to segregate specifically in order to make it easier for the judgmental racists to avoid sin), but by rebuking and correcting the spiritual problem. Accommodation merely changes how the problem manifests itself – and pastors actually have an obligation to correct their parishioners on such matters, particularly if they are widespread in a given parish.
I’m curious what consequences you want for congregations with some who do not acknowledge the full validity of the NO and V2. Shall we have an equivalent litmus test in the NO congregations requiring them to acknowledge the full validity of Humanae Vitae and the Church’s teaching on contraception, with the same consequences?
So, you are suggesting that people who wish to kneel refrain from doing so because OTHERS might “judge” them? Really? I am not a kneeler, but I have no issue with those who wish to do so. ( and I would gladly participate in Kneeling like ALL of us used to do if communion rails were brought back). I certainly dont think the kneelers should change their behavior toward Jesus in the Eucharist to satisfy the mean-spirited nit-picking of others, including this clueless Bishop. Clearly his changes were instituted in order to make kneeling more difficult or uncomfortable. Pathetic.
If receiving Communion is so perfunctory that it becomes a conveyor belt line, something is seriously wrong with the level of reverence which should be part of this part of the Mass. I have observed some kneelers in my church’s Communion line. They only takes them an extra second or two. And so what? Where are we all rushing off to? Does the Mass and Communion mean so little that we constantly check our watch to run away as fast as possible? If so that sounds again like a serious lack of proper disposition regarding what we have just been a part of. Is Jesus not worth an hour of our time once a week? Personally I think that often there are few enough people at Mass that fewer Eucharistic Ministers should be employed. In my church on Sunday we have the priest and 3 EM’s giving out Communion. In frankness, one EM would be plenty, and it would give the rest of us a bit more time to pray post-communion.
The Mass is not a factory looking for the fastest way to move people out of the church. Or at least, it SHOULD NOT be. A really good priest would make certain that adequate reverence attends ALL parts of the Mass, including Communion.
Many good points; also if you take on the hand you’re supposed to step to the side and face the tabernacle/altar/Cross and receive, then make the sign of the Cross, at least that’s how I remember it. That’s often not done.
Absolutely no problems in the numerous churches I have visited over the years, including where I have been a parishioner. (I’d kneel but likely fall over, so happy for those with a kneeler option 🙌🏻.)
However what I have found disturbing—and difficult to ignore—are those church attendees in front of me that proceed towards Communion like they are in line for fast food pu.
(Wearing shorts and flip flops reinforces that impression.) At least at one time reverent reception in the hand was TAUGHT with regular reminders.
I would also remark that the anti (universal) Latin tirade confounds me who was an Army dependent and heard Mass in the common language but also native ones. But then, like Who we receive in Communion has been made as obscure as the understanding of the Mass.
Grateful for those Pastors who wisely and lovingly “meet” their parishioners where they are and encourage growth in knowledge and sacredness of the Mass.
Our little rural parish church uses the altar rail at every Mass & the “traffic flow” for receiving Communion is actually much smoother & more efficient than at churches who don’t utilize that option.
Efficiency might not be the primary reason for altar rails but it’s certainly a benefit.
“To prohibit a person to receive Holy Communion in a way which he feels is the most appropriate (pious) expression of his faith/relationship with God is to engage in a soul’s violation.” He did not prohibit the eucharist! We’ve been to reconciliation, and we are ready to receive our Lord. Unless I am reading what he said/did incorrectly, he did not prohibit anyone from kneeling if that was the choice. I have read the statement twice. To have the kneelers then prohibits those who prefer standing is the other side of the coin? On the other hand, he could have expressed himself more clearly, patiently, and of course pastorally. Peace and Merry Christmas to all!
We aren’t required to use the kneelers or kneel at the altar rail, Lucy. At least not in our parish.
We have older people at Mass with knee troubles who need to stand at the altar rail and others who prefer to. But most everyone else at our church kneels for Communion. And the lines move smoothly.
That it is stupid to believe that kneeling in some way adds to respect is completely hogwash!! Say that to the Magi, whose kneeling to the Christ and then opened their gifts, will I hope that the good bishop choke on those words when he reads them on the sixth of January!! Even Indiana Jones understood that kneeling can save your life aka the trial he understands goes at the conclusion of The Last Crusade!!!
In my experience, heavy-handed autocratic rule by clergy oftentimes has homosexuality or same-sex attraction at its roots. It seems that raw power is what these clergy lust for most.
Deacon: Michael Vores went down that rabbit hole, perhaps best we avoid it! The link is only conjecture.
Sounds to me that you’re the one who needs to take his blindfold off. Step into reality, my friend. BTW, I just might have more professional experience than you regarding clerical sexual aberrations.
Br. Jaques: May we assume that you’re good friends with Michael Voris? You seem quite familiar with him.
Augustine told us the will to power is a form of lust (Libido Dominandi).
Oh, wonderful… So, in cautioning others about making a possibly unfounded allegation, you insinuate an unfounded allegation of Vorisesque immorality.
Don’t waste your time. I doubt this “Br.” Jacques has ever heard of Aquinas.
I was endorsing Deacon’s post with its implicit notice that the sin of lust, once one fully succumbs to it -the pursuit of satisfaction may occur in two seemly different domains that our modern moral illiteracy often cannot fathom as the same thing.
TPR: Exactly!
Exasperating.
Guy needs to get out of the ’70s.
I’m so torn and tempted by the bad decision to prevent kneeling in comfort, which is permitted & encouraged, to believe that Bishop Martin is mean-spirited or driven by ideology or malintent. But on this Vigil of Christmas I choose to trust that he’s simply been deceived by the evil one into thinking this is a good thing for his flock. Of course it’s obvious with those of us with eyes to see that the bishop’s decision runs contrary to Church teaching: that we shouldn’t unnecessarily harm others, which is precisely what this does. He’s harming his flock with terrible news just before Nativity that they’re to be forced to choose between kneeling on the floor, perhaps on days when mud is tracked into the nave near the sanctuary or to kneel and struggle to stand after receiving their Lord or to forgo what had become their pious way of encountering the Eucharistic Lord. Why? Because the bishop misunderstands the liturgical history of the Church in the United States. If the Church has no problem with kneeling, and she doesn’t, then why place a burden on the faithful who embrace this millennia old practice of adoration and intimacy? It’s an unforced error. And it drives a wedge between the bishop and his flock, especially his presbyterate. Add on that it’s very public knowledge that he’s been counseled against this decision, it leads to the question: has the good bishop been blackmailed? Why else would he proceed and throw caution to the wind? No bishops are jumping to come to his aid to defend his decision as rational or pastoral. All we see is a man who appears to be unwilling to hear from his lay faithful and priests, which makes him appear tone deaf, unreasonable, insensitive, autocratic, dictatorial, lacking in pastoral zeal, imprudent, unkind, uncharitable. But I refuse to believe that a bishop of the Church has taken this course. The sad idea that someone has dirt on him and is forcing him to make such silly unforced errors is extreme and the sad idea that the bishop chooses freely to make a wrong decision in bad faith seems utterly absurd, so I’m left thinking he’s been duped. We must pray and sacrifice for Bishop Martin. God’s grace is sufficient. Hope against hope that good will and kindness will prevail. Come, Lord Jesus, and tarry not.
Kneeling is a sign of pleading for mercy- You know my sins but please have mercy.
Without the Eucharist we’re just another Protestant church.
I imagine people will just kneel anyway.
I worked in an office were we put the final papers in marked folders but not bound with the clips. An employee transferred in from another office that did bond them and kept harping on the management to do the same. Finally the head manager told her, “When in Rome …”
Perhaps something is going on behind the scenes that we’re unaware of but it really does seems tone deaf.
Granted, many folks today are less acquainted with Latin, but the posture of kneeling? Seriously. We already kneel during the liturgy. Why not to receive Holy Communion if we so choose?
His statement wasn’t that people do not currently understand the Latin in the Mass, but that they were essentially too dumb to ever understand it, even with aids. Particularly those on the margins… I guess their poverty or unusual circumstances is supposed to render them uncommonly stupid in general? Rather odd, given that I know a cognitively impaired person who learns the basics of various languages for fun. It’s almost like those who are capable of learning English vocabulary are also capable of learning Latin vocabulary.
The domineering condescension is impressive. Even if something extremely weird were going on behind the scenes, that would not legitimize lying about the reasons, or giving such insulting and illegitimate reasons.
Kneeling during the Eucharistic Prayer is an American exception/indult. The rest of the world stands during that part of the Mass. So should we. Time to end that indult for the Church in the US. That would go a long way toward ending the false claims of preconciliarists that kneeling is the superior posture.
“The rest of the world” varies. In Australia kneeling during the time mentioned by you is widespread.
To an Eastern Orthodox (me) the orders which ban the expressions of devotion to God look plain absurd. The Orthodox Church typically regulates the minimum required piety, like a minimal number of bows at certain moments of the Liturgy. The rest is up to an individual. People can do extra bows, prostrations, etc. if they feel like that – it is given.
If I feel like prostrating myself in front of the Chalice it is my business – as long as I am far enough not to endanger the Chalice to be knocked. Catholic practice of reception while kneeling at the rail is very safe in that respect, much safer than standing. It is about communion, about God – while the orders which ban are about a personal ego and a sense of power.
All this boiled down to one thing: “If a person kneels before God, who am I, a mere human, to prohibit that? It is about God and not about me”. Well, the bad news: those who ban kneeling are not aware of the supremacy of God including over them.
So should the indult for receiving Communion in the hand also be abolished?
Not so. Everywhere that I have attended Mass around the world, congregants have knelt during the Eucharistic Prayer.
Anglican parishioners in Jamaica kneel at the altar rail to receive Communion.
Perhaps Bishop Martin could take a tour of that Montego Bay parish for inspiration. They also have a steel drum band in the choir loft.
🙂🌴🌴
Hmmm, kneeling is the superior posture. Bet on it.
Jesus knelt in the garden of Gethsemane. Though He was not in Rome, you would have had him do what the Romans did.
Europe Catholics doing something does not make it good, right, or just. US Catholics are not obligated to imitate Catholics in other countries who have lost reverence and humility in liturgical gesture.
good points
(and He was pleading for mercy, for the cup to pass, but the Father’s will be done)
Churchmen use the promise of obedience (and for religious, the vow of obedience) like a battle axe to enforce and inflict their twisted and often heretical beliefs. They inflict fear into priests and religious who have no other means of support, no place to go, and no recourse in a corrupt system. To a lesser extent they do the same to the faithful. Their attitude is “my way or the highway.” This is egregious sinful behavior. It’s abuse, plain and simple. Our Lord promised Satan would not destroy the Church. He never said churchmen would enjoy the same promise. Iscariot was the first “bishop” to sell out but he wasn’t the last. We are sheep among wolves.
The good news is that we have a Good Shepherd to protect us from the wolves. He IS born. He IS saving us. He IS redeeming us. As we celebrate the Nativity of Jesus Christ, let us not forget He is already victorious and Satan and his foul minions have lost. The victory of the Cross fulfills the hope of the manger.
CHRISTUS NATUS EST PRO NOBIS
He promised that the Church would not be destroyed “Lo, I am with you *always* even unto the end of ages.”
Been in the finance world for 40 plus years. Many instances of management saying, you need to DO THIS to succeed, even while the walls are falling in around us. Tone deaf and thinking only inside the box, as the saying goes.
Agricultural leaders have given the same kinds of advice, knowall. “Get big or get out”, etc.
The Amish are some of the very few family farmers who are out of debt, flourishing, and making a decent living.
Just a little PS:
I listened to an AG PhD candidate giving a talk to other cattle producers about an infectious disease endemic to our area. After he crunched all the data collected the results showed that by following the extension service’s best cattle management practices you are up to 28 times more likely to have this disease spread through your herd.🐂🐂🐂
Oh geez, yes, Uncle Sam’s advice and free money has ruined many good farmers – one of the best programs has been the extension services from state universities, at least in the midwest. Directly working with farmers with no bureaucy (sp) – but they gave more recent advice to get big in the dairy like the Dutch do and that has not been so good in many ways.
The Amish in our area raised their hourly rate recently, as they’re one of few (locals)that can work on construction projects like pole barns – they’re in demand more and more.
I really appreciate the extension service & have learned a lot from them but yes, they can advise based upon research grants paid for by equipment & pharmaceutical companies, etc. So you have to be cautious. Test everything, keep what’s good.
I wish we had some Amish folks here. Maybe one day…They’re definitely spreading out across the nation.
We’ve got the Anglican Ordinate, why not a Latin Ordinate?
And with but a week to go-we have a
POTY Nomination.
Post
Of
The
Year.
Succint and devastatingly penetrating.
Are you Catholic? The term is “ordinariate.” And, what are you suggesting about a “Latin ordinate”?
I’m not the author, but I’ll state my interpretation-and why I made such an endorsement.
The assertion I think is that if the Church can allow the existence of an Anglican Ordinariate-with a different Liturgy and rubrics (The Eucharist is administered under both species with intinction and the old English prayers are rather soaring- “I humbly vouchsafe thee”) to meet the needs of who want to be Catholic and have a valid Mass using the prayers that they are accustomed to and revere, certainly some sort of way for Catholics who are accustomed to and revere the Tridentine Mass.
An “Ordinariate” may not be the proper ecclesial term or vehicle, but if I’ve interpreted the meaning of the post properly, it does point out an obvious inconsistency in the war against the “Traditional Latin Mass”.
Diogenes: my apologies, you are correct “ordinariate” , granted by Pope Benedict to the Anglicans who wanted to become Catholics and retain their liturgy and customs. I am suggesting that some kind of arrangement could be made for parishes who wished to retain their liturgy and Latin mass. Perhaps they could have their own Bishops and operate outside of the local Bishop. I believe that Opus Dei also at one time some kind of special status. We also have the various Eastern Rite models. Why not some kind of alternate provision for those who prefer the Latin Mass? Just a suggestion!
Br. Jaques: I see your point and in my opinion, it has merit. One cautionary point, however: There is a principle of Lex orandi, Lex credendi. As you worship, so will you believe. My guess is that those who worship according to the Novus Ordo and who allow all sorts of aberrant accretions to enter into liturgical practice will suffer an erosion of true Catholic teaching and belief. I only have to point readers here to what has transpired in the Church over the past 75 years of Novus Ordo craziness. Catholics get divorced in similar numbers as atheists. Catholics practice contraception likewise. The majority of Catholics support abortion. The majority of Catholics do NOT believe that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.
Why am I reminded of the abbot who proudly recounted that his confreres at the General Chapter regarded him as a “left-wing brat”?
The office of the bishop exists to minister to the broken. As pride is the great supporter of sin, the antidote is found mainly in deep humility. A shepherd must not only preach this but live it visibly for the faithful. When it is lacking, the Church suffers. May the Holy Spirit grant all bishops the grace to truly emulate the humility of Jesus Christ.
Kneeling is more reverent than standing because kneeling is a posture of surrender and trust. A kneeling person cannot defend themselves. A standing person can defend themselves. Therefore, to kneel is express one’s surrender to and trust of the person one kneels before.
Now you might say that in our egalitarian age with its lack of hierarchical relationships, such a gesture has lost its significance. This is the way that nobles and peasants behave, and the gesture has meaning in the nature of their relation to each other. The relationship of middle class people to each other is different. We are peers, not vassals.
And it is true that the language that we apply to God is derived from the relationship of peasants to nobles. We call Christ lord and king, which are terms from that ancient relationship. We call no man lord today, and king is an essentially ceremonial title.
And it would certainly be fair to say that the character of the liturgical reform was a move from a lord-and-peasant form of worship based on supplication, to a middle-class form of worship based on participation.
But the question then becomes, how far can we push this middle-class form of relationship as an expression of our relationship to God? In my lifetime I have noticed a profound change from habitually using the word “Christ” (which denotes an office) to habitually using “Jesus” (a personal name). The move from kneeling to standing to receive communion seems of a piece with this. Kneeling expresses fealty exchanged for food. Standing expresses a transaction between equals.
And yet there is a problem in all this. If Christ (sorry, Jesus) is not king but president, is He term limited, and when exactly is the next election going to be held?
It is interesting that our society has gone from denying the natural hierarchies among humans, to acting like God is not particularly superior to us. We exchange intimacy with God for informality and egalitarianism. We feel close by acting like He’s a friend *and no more*, even though this narrows our conception of Him to such an extent that we aren’t really close to Him at all, so much as attached to our preferred mental image of Him.
Reading the writings of Saints about prayer, you see them move easily between speaking of great confidence and intimacy with God, telling Him about all the smallest things, to reverence and awe and feeling themselves to be nothing, and full of sinfulness and helplessness, without missing a beat. The liturgy they were formed in sees no contradiction between our abject inferiority, and God seeking and achieving intimacy with us.
Salve, Mark.
“A kneeling person cannot defend themselves. A standing person can defend themselves”. This is feminist inclusive language rubbish, Mark. Feminism seeks the destruction of Western Christian civilisation, and the Church with it. We should always try to avoid accommodating feminist claptrap.
A kneeling person is singular; themselves is plural – grammatical nonsense. If you are reluctant to write himself, perhaps you could write kneeling persons cannot defend themselves.
How does fem enter into this? Both sexes can kneel.
This is somewhat of an informal forum; the punctuation and grammatical accuracy is not always perfect, and there’s not much editing, if the comment is approved and posted. Mr. Olson can correct me on this if my observation is off (or would it be observations?)
An interesting first paragraph. Never thought of the defenseless angle. Other than crossing your arms in front of you, playing possumm after the first blows or general supplication there is no defense or flight possible.
If I remember correctly some fairly recent martyrs were made to kneel with their hands tied behind their backs before the violent act was carried out against them.
Bishop Michael Martin is an awakened, wide awoke OFM conv as are many religious order men. His final place of studies Boston College is an ultra woke Jesuit school [a young alumni friend was led to believe God is everywhere in the sense that you can worship a tree].
All of this the legacy of the shadow Vat II Church that created their own misconceived interpretation of what the Council actually recommended, and which was furthered during the previous pontificate. The theological notion is that we don’t need ‘props’ [kneelers, incense, bells] to be in touch with God. These ancient practices keep us locked into a limited spiritual awareness.This is what Leo XIV is faced with, whether he agrees or not.
If I’m critical of where we’re at and find undue reticence in Pope Leo, that is frequently followed by a well tempered admonition to be patient, that The man is very deliberative, he needs time to work things out. I take these appeals seriously. Although, as we watch and wait progressive bishops are restructuring Church and Catholicity perhaps beyond rectification. My thoughts are that if his major effort is to promote unity, the extremes taken by these bishops will be quite difficult to incorporate with the remaining more traditional, perhaps better said those faithful to what Vat II actually proposed.
“The theological notion is that we don’t need ‘props’ [kneelers, incense, bells] to be in touch with God. These ancient practices keep us locked into a limited spiritual awareness.”
It is a narcissistic Gnosticism. A human being naturally needs stimulation of his senses (God-given senses!). And the body here, being used properly, helps the soul/spirit to focus on God. There is a documented case (described by Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh) of a Western convert to the Eastern Orthodoxy who was going on about how he does not understand the icons at all, unable to connect with them. An Orthodox girl pulled his sleeve and said “try to kneel”. He did and he connected with the image after some time because his posture of kneeling changed something in his person re: the icon and the depicted. The body influences the spirit and vice versa. To ignore one’s own body is disembodiment = new Gnosticism.
It is also narcissistic because those who preach think they know better and feel entitled to impose their own ignorance on others. They are also ignorant beyond endurance; they obviously did even bother to study this subject of asceticism.
“My thoughts are that if his major effort is to promote unity, the extremes taken by these bishops will be quite difficult to incorporate with the remaining more traditional, perhaps better said those faithful to what Vat II actually proposed.”
I think one should first establish what is true Christian unity. It is not “a peaceful coexistence” under the same roof of covert/open heretics and those who try to be faithful to Christ. Unity is defined by following Christ as His Church has been doing since His Ascension. I do not have “unity” with the Bishops who do “gay-Masses”; neither do I wish to have it. They are out of the Church via their actions and I have nothing to do with them. They exclude themselves from the Body of Christ and I am not obliged “to strive for unity” with them. If they want unity they must repent.
As long as a person follows the Lord and sticks to the Church’s true teaching he is united with Christ, His Saints and others who follow Him and they all together make the Body of Christ, the Church.
As soon as we establish this fact, that a sure sign of unity is faithfulness to Christ and Church’s correct teaching, the PL’s argument of “unity” falls apart because it is based on entirely human values and reasoning. “Be with us” is their reasoning while the true reasoning is “be with Christ and His Church”. PL is promoting the entirely human idea of unity and not just that – that idea of “unity” is very superficial and unhealthy. It is based on keeping quiet, not raising the issues, not discussing them openly. It is based on “throwing bones” to various parties/manipulation. This false “unity” is only needed to keep people quiet.
I spiritually-emotionally-mentally-physically-need to kneel when I am receiving:
“My LORD, my GOD”, JESUS THE CHRIST in HOLY Eucharist.
To not be able to do so would create soul-sadness,as HE; THE Holy Mass and Holy Eucharist -As ONE- IS Life’s SUMMIT.
I still need to demonstrate my intentions and belief in my actions: clothing, speech, and reverent posturing accustomed in my Catholic soul journey.
There will never be a deeper way for me to receive MY SAVIOR.
As a 70 yrs old Catholic, I hope to always be able to bring with me my petite walking stick of wood; so I will have added support when kneeling and for when I stand after I receive MY LORD.
The devout priests and alar servers of all ages safeguard OUR LORD responsibly and glide respectively in Holy posturing and Reverence as the faithful all receive. I will complete my personal portion of assisting at MASS in my Catholic Mind/ Baptised Soul/Body in the years that remain for me as a sincere Catholic.
This posturing is essential for me in the Catholic culture given to me.
This is not the first time devout postures and sweet devotions and other omissions have been suspension/ limited. Catholic Churches are Shrines that are visible, auditorial and bodily functional. We give from our needs and seek holiness as we need The Almighty Father to hear our whispered prayers n heart intentions.
Its individual and collection, inclusively portraying Scriptural: morals, values, lifestyle while inviting all nations, sects n creeds to Follow HIM.
One GOD-One Faith-One Baptism.
I have been ridiculed, gossiped about, thus silenced and cast-away; like my single simple voice was over-the-top so did not matter.
It caused me to stumble greatly.
More matured and steady;,I now will speak from my soul’s conscience; respecting my spiritual need:Kneel. It is my prayer for Mercy n Grace :
Falling to my knees.
I will no longer try to be heard through syllables. I will not stumble spiritually, when I kneel for my personal reception of my LORD and GOD truly present in HIS Divinity at THE HOLY Eucharistic Feast. My Savior.
I pray wherever I am; I will also continue to listen at home to instrumental Latin music like Ave Maria and Anima Christi- and swell in my heart-soul when all versions and languages are honoured at my parish.
I wept today at Holy Mass when it was tenderly announced about the kneelers being removed from our Catholic Parish.
I had been really sick over Christmas and New Years so it was not rehearsed within my soul to be ready.
The Holy beauty of The Immaculate Conception Parish in Hendersonville NC., is my Highlight. Even though It’s a large parish; I find it visibly welcoming for all cultures, their devout ways are all respectful.
There are a number of weak ones and seniors too and happy families expecting babies; so it seems like a forced change-especially those in tender life cycles.
Genuflecting, Sign of Cross, Holy Water, visiting the Gospels through stained glass and reverent statues depicting the Journeys of The Love of God,Kneeling at Mass in Adoration and kneeling for Holy Communion and singing in Latin and in vernacular tongues (Spanish n English) are the inclusive and spiritually Sublime. All unite by gathering us one by one; to grace-fully step out of the noisy and often seriously upsetting world ; entering quietly into the foyer doorway of Heaven’s Altar Presence and receive as thirsting Children of GOD.
…
Civil Court Rooms- one is demanded to stand to show respect.
…
…
Catholic MASS n Holy services OFFER the Highest GIfTS
To set one FREE of Debits one Cannot Justly Pay for through…
Celestial Court of Heaven; In the Almighty Father’s presence in Jesus’ Holy corporal Body and Precious Blood –
It is above ALL Earthly Courts.
…
I choose to show I comprehend -to go further and Kneel. I pray to kneel even as it becomes more difficult as He is My True LORD, GOD, Judge and Savior.
My LORD and MY GOD
Please Have Mercy us all.
Touch each of us with your Eternal Unlimited Merciful Graces
To be made worthy to see you and be permitted to
Join with your Angelic Choir and Qodesh Saints
To praise Thee Forever
And never be separated again from Thee
Prepare us to change to become most Holy-Wise-Humble;
behaving morally, humbly showing mercy and kindness .
Yes please renew our minds so our lives are pleasing so;
At the moment of the ending this earthly breath;
-You will justly bring us to your Heavenly Court to Honor n Praise THEE. Forever.
Amen.
These directives from a bishop consumed by his own sense of power are absolutely contrary to what Vatican II directed to be done. In Sacrsanctum Concillium, the document detailing how the Mass should be organically developed, it specifically says to retain the Latin as much as possible. It specified many other things that were completely ignored by Bugnini when that Masonic snake created the Novus Ordo out of whole cloth. Bishop Martin is a subverter, not a supporter, of the religious life of his flock. He is the shepherd who abandons the flock. He should be laicized.
The bishop is correct about Communion posture at Mass. There is a sizable number of Catholics, influenced by a deficient Eucharistic theology, who consider Mass to be a mini adoration session. Hence, the bells at consecration, a prolonged elevation, and the insistence on kneeling for receiving Communion. Mass is not for adoring the Eucharist. Mass is not an exclusive “me and Jesus” moment. Mass is the communal celebration of the Paschal Mystery whereby a community is identified, formed, and sent as disciples of Christ. If you want to kneel and adore, do that on your own outside of Mass.
What lies behind oppositon to the bishop’s common-sense, correct edict about not using Communion rails and not encouraging nor promoting kneeling during Communion, is a deficient preconciliar Eucharistic theology. The GIRM says that standing to receive Communion is to be the normative posture. People and priests don’t get to disregard that universal norm in favor of a different local custom because their personal piety that mistakenly considers Mass to be a mini adoration session leads them to desire to kneel or to consider kneeling to be a superior posture for Communion. Individuals may kneel if they wish, but kneeling is not to be encouraged nor provided for as if the norm to receive standing is insignificant. What’s so difficult or wrong about understanding and enforcing that?
Again, it’s the preconciliarists with their deficient theology who are the troublemakers, yet they maliciously accuse the bishop of wrongdoing.
That’s just officious baloney.
Those who believe in the Hermeneutic of Continuity are not pre-conciliarists. Orthodox Catholics with a deep sense of history and a proper understanding development of doctrine and practice realize antiquarianism does not promote unity. One of the major rationales given for receivng from the standing posture it reflects rising with Christ. That being the case, it is even more appropriate to receive the Holy Eucharist, our healing, while kneeling as men and women sickened by sin and ignorance FOLLOWED by rising to vividly portray the power of the Resurrected Christ. Moreover, to minimize and dismiss the significance of bodily gestures like receiving on the knees (for those whom it is possible, of course), is inherently anti-incarnational and psychologically naive. May God forgive Bishop Martin for lacking pastoral sensibility and for not exercising his canonical authority to make local provision for those wishing to kneel to receive Holy Communion. The norm in the GIRM does not forbid receiving on the knees and actually forbids forbidding it. The GIRM states a norm of standing BUT ALSO acknowledges the right of the communicant to receive on the knees. Finally, Bishop Martin’s appeal to Traditones Custodes to suppress even practices associated with the TLM demonstates a blind eye (hopefuly, out of ignorance rather than willfulness) of the fact that TC is a raw exercise of clericalism and hypocrisy, with the lies and manipulations suggested by several prelates back in 2021 now proven by investigative reporting in 2025.
In all respect to you, you seem to be saying that the Eucharistic theology of the entire history of the Church was defective up to 1970. That cannot be the case.
Also, I do object to your wording that the celebration of Mass is essentially about forming a community and sending it forth. The Mass is the unbloody representation of the once for all sacrifice of the Son for the remission of sins. It is 100 percent an adoration session, in which we as the Body of Christ come to the foot of the cross to behold and commune with Him, and be fed by Him. This is how He gives us grace. It is only through this sharing that we are a community at all. We can only be connected to each other through sharing His death and life.
At the name of Jesus, every knee shall bend and every tongue confess that He is Lord. No unity is lost where Christians obey this Scripture.
Your first paragraph was what occurred to me as well.
Right now, during Christmas, we are singing, “Oh come let us adore Him (x 3) Christ the Lord!”
Why do we recall from several years back when the USCCB mandated that Communion was now a collective “procession” and that all should remain standing until all had returned to their pews or seats or whatever…
The original “train wreck” of which Bishop Martin is the trailing and obsolete caboose.
One can guess why Fr. James Martin might favor the standing position, butt we respectfully wonder about this Bishop Michael Martin. It used to be that good theology could only be done on the knees!
Canon 750 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines. 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.[new]” “Canon 751 of the Code of Canon Law states that schism is “the refusal of submission to the supreme pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” Canon 1364 stipulates that the penalty for this crime is excommunication “latae sententiae,” i.e., automatically upon the commission of the offense.” Furthermore, “Canon 188 §4 states that among the actions which automatically (ipso facto) cause any cleric to lose his office, even without any declaration on the part of a superior, is that of “defect[ing] publicly from the Catholic faith” (” A fide catholica publice defecerit“).
Only in a complementary relationship of Love, in a Holy Marriage, between one man and one woman who have both the ability and desire to exist in relationship as husband and wife, can two become “One Body, One Spirit In Love “, creating a new family.
One cannot deny The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament Of Holy Matrimony, and thus God’s intention that we respect the inherent Dignity of the human person from the moment of conception, and remain in communion with Christ And His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
Catholics of good faith continue to act as if they amazed and shocked by the actions of clerics like this Bishop Martin. Why? This is a pattern we have seen countless times everywhere in the world since Vatican II. Many bishops – MOST, in fact – hate the Church, the Mass, and the faithful Catholics in their flock. They want to destroy everything. It is just that simple. After the reign of Bergoglio, they are more emboldened than ever. And people who think his handpicked successor is going to rectify this situation are simply living in a fantasy world of denial.
Bingo.
About 30 years ago a church was built with no kneelers. The priest was there for about 20 years, and the parish muddled along. The current priest has just about double the once shrinking parishioners. Another church had identification along the street. The sign read Catholic Community. It now reads Catholic Church
Don’t like saying it but TJWilliams accurately describes the current situation. He is missed since he has been absent from Breitbart.
Blah blah blah, etc.
(At the Latin Mass parishioners kneel at the Communion rail to receive the host)
Yada yada yada, the use of the Communion rail will no longer be allowed
Nip nip nip.
Blah blah blah yada yada yada,
Etc.
WHERE ARE ALL THE PARISHIONERS?
Adeptly worded. True unity is one faith, one baptism. We can have different liturgical practice although what we believe theologically and morally requires no distinction.
This response is intended above for Anna’s response to my comment, and was misplaced.
Yeah, well, anyway, clearly someone needs a strong dose of psychological / spiritual help. This is abuse and to have reach this level so early in his tenure as bishop speaks volumes.
Where do these guys come from, anyway? No siblings, perhaps.
your last sentence – spoiled kid syndrome
might be, but made me laugh being one of the younger of a large brood
Kneeling to God is not “defenselessness”.
supplication; what we do physically is irrelevant because God can do what He wills.
physically, if you’re kneeling you are at a disadvantage if you need to defend
Happy New Year; may the human violence cease and the conversions expand exponentially across the globe!
Thank you knowall and many happy providential returns.