Were our Hearts Not Burning? (Lk 24:32)
Fr. Paul Ward                                                                      Home

Reply to a question

Q: Is it licit to genuflect to the tabernacle, not only at the beginning and end of Holy Mass, but also between those two moments when crossing in front of the Blessed Sacrament which is located in the sanctuary?

It would seem not. For is it said,

During Mass, three genuflections are made by the priest celebrant: namely, after the showing of the host, after the showing of the chalice, and before Communion. Certain specific features to be observed in a concelebrated Mass are noted in their proper place (cf. above, nos. 210-251).

If, however, the tabernacle with the Most Blessed Sacrament is present in the sanctuary, the priest, the deacon, and the other ministers genuflect when they approach the altar and when they depart from it, but not during the celebration of Mass itself.[1]

R:        I respond saying that obedience requires the observance of the law because of the authority of the lawgiver. One cannot obey only one part of the law and not another. This would be criminal. Hence a tax evader will be imprisoned even though he does not murder people.

Furthermore, the law must not be interpreted in such a way as to make it inapplicable.[2] For the nature of a law is a command of the lawgiver for the common good established by proclamation. For there to be a command and then have it deemed inapplicable by the same lawgiver would be a contradiction.

In the documents that follow, the following can be clearly and logically deduced: We are always to genuflect before the Most Blessed Sacrament, and to bow before other sacred objects including the altar. Confusion has set in where the GIRM, prescribing an altar and indeed a sanctuary without a Tabernacle, requires a bow in coherence with these presuppositions of liturgical law. There is no contradiction given the presuppositions; but given a tabernacle, the law remains to genuflect. The authoritative source documents below make this clear (except for him who refuses to assent to such clarity).

Responding to the objection, I will do so in five points.

a. It is evident from what is said here that this law is not meant to be absolutely observed, and that indeed more than three genuflections are allowed at the mass.

- A Genuflection is mandated by the missal on the day of the Annunciation…

- … and on Christmas.

- Genuflections are foreseen when exposition follows the Oremus, yet before the blessing (benediction) and recessional.[3]

All of these add up to three. But given the premise of an altar and Church without a tabernacle, genuflecting three times, at the consecration and preceding the priest’s communion, only affirms the principle of genuflecting before the Eucharist.

b. This cite is a partial quote. It is also said in the same number cited that,

A genuflection, made by bending the right knee to the ground, signifies adoration, and therefore it is reserved for the Most Blessed Sacrament, as well as for the Holy Cross from the solemn adoration during the liturgical celebration on Good Friday until the beginning of the Easter Vigil.

We therefore genuflect to the blessed sacrament. Any other interpretation would make this norm inapplicable; yet the law was meant to be observed. Now, the impossible never binds. It is impossible to both genuflect to the Most Blessed Sacrament and not genuflect at the same time. It is therefore only possible to observe this law in all its integrity where there is no tabernacle in the sanctuary, or where the tabernacle is displaced noticeably from center. That is, it is licit to omit the genuflection when the Eucharist is not present – if, that is, we wish to observe the whole law, and not only a part of it. On the contrary, we would only be observing one part of n. 274 and not another at any given point in time. Again, in norm 122, where it says, “On reaching the altar, the priest and ministers make a profound bow,” yet no law is stipulated what to do when one approaches an altar with a tabernacle, or when one approaches the tabernacle simply; and it is not to be assumed that the GIRM contemplates or foresees an altar with a tabernacle (cf. GIRM n. 315).[4]

c. The second is the authority of the proclamation. The edition of the GIRM cited is promulgated by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (2002). The proclamations of any bishops conference do not have the force of law unless ratified by the Holy See.[5] A certain type of  confirmation was granted in 2003[6], but the approval was given to the translation, and we need to attend to that fact that the only thing approved technically were the translations and not the changes. Let us heed to this subtle yet important distinction.

As an argument per accidens, it was recommended to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that their suggested changes take place in a document as an appendix to the GIRM, with expressions such as “in the United States,” “…but such a document would not have the force of law, in the way that the General Instruction itself would.”[7] Instead the American adaptations were mixed in, most obviously for example in n. 160, confusing what “would not have the force of law” with those things that do have the force of law. It is probable therefore that confusion was deliberately introduced by the translators.

d. All of the law must be observed. Church law states that, “Genuflection on one knee is prescribed before the Blessed Sacrament whether it be reserved in the tabernacle or exposed for public adoration.”[8] Interpreting the GIRM in such a way as to make this norm inapplicable is obviously against the intention of the lawgiver, as was stated in the response.

e. The same authority of the Church which promulgated the GIRM, namely the Holy See, also foresees that we genuflect to teach.

A simple but effective form of Eucharistic catechesis is the material care of everything concerned with the church and especially the altar and tabernacle: cleanliness and decor, worthy vestments and vessels, care in celebrating the liturgical ceremonies, genuflection etc.[9]

It is therefore not part of the Catechetical intention, as explicitly stated by the competent lawgiving authority, that we not genuflect to the Eucharist. Therefore it is licit to omit the genuflection when the Eucharist is not present.

-------

    Two friends in response individually pointed out how inept liturgical law often is. For example, the law states that we kneel after the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God). Then we are to go in procession to communion. Then the norm for reception is standing, with a wimpy little nod of the head before hand. I guess the procession is on our knees, and we nod kneeling, then we stand to receive? Then what? Do we return to our pews walking on our knees?

    One way to approach it, perhaps, is to consider that law often attempts to codify custom. We Catholics have certain practices and customs, and we have a great history of Church Popes and pastors who have encouraged their practice. Honoring the custom of genuflecting, of not processing to communion on our knees, etc., is perfectly fine.

    Another topic that should be investigated is whether or not there are biased and ideological influences among the members of the subcommittees of the USCCB, which continually strive to disrupt Catholic practice, contradict our faith, separate the Catholic Church in America from Rome, distort practice, convert Catholics into Protestants as regards faith and morals, etc. I think anyone with the slightest bit of perspicacity will know the answer to this question.