Yet, as others have observed, it was the Romans (and not the Jєωs), who mocked our Lord with the genuflection. 

It seems to me that +Gueranger must be pulling in facts from sources outside of Scripture (ie Tradition/Church Fathers) for his claim.  How do we know that the Jews didn’t genuflect when Our Lord was being interrogated by Annas/Chiaphus?  How do we know that the Jews didn’t mock Our Lord by genuflections when He was on the cross?  They certainly mocked His Divinity as He hung there.  


Scripture is not very detailed on all of Christ's passion.  The Jєωιѕн genuflection mockery may be proved from other sources.  I think +Gueranger deserves the benefit of the doubt here…

At my 1962-Rite Independent chapel, I did not bend the knee when it came time to pray for the Jєωs ... was the only guy in the entire church standing.  I prayed for them sincerely to convert, but the Jєωs are attempting to get the entire world to bend the knee to them, and I refuse therefore to bend the knee for them in prayer.

At my 1962-Rite Independent chapel, I did not bend the knee when it came time to pray for the Jєωs ... was the only guy in the entire church standing.  I prayed for them sincerely to convert, but the Jєωs are attempting to get the entire world to bend the knee to them, and I refuse therefore to bend the knee for them in prayer.

Indeed. There is also, in the pre-1955 Holy Week, the 12th reading on Holy Saturday that tells the story of Nabuchodonosor and his idol, and he commanded the three young men to bow to his idol and they refused. The Church omits the genuflection after that reading too, because of the mention of the idolatrous genuflection in the reading.

So is this insulting to idolators that we don't genuflect there either, and should we genuflect there so as not to offend idolators?

Whoa, wait a second there, buddy. I'm not sure we should go around casually accusing Gueranger of error, especially when we're talking about what is written in the gospel. Gueranger could read the gospel just as well as you can, and if that's what he said, then he's the one who is correct here.

Sorry to scandalize you, but Gueranger’s error is widely acknowledged (unless you take the wider interpretation I suggested):

It was the Romans who mocked our Lord with genuflection, and any argument to the contrary would be conjecture not supported by revelation.

It was the Romans who mocked our Lord with genuflection, and any argument to the contrary would be conjecture not supported by revelation.

So you limit "Revelation" to Scripture alone?  Have you studied what the Church Fathers may have said about the matter?

[Your post above implies Sola Scriptura.  Perhaps you should withhold judgment that Dom Gueranger was in error until you've studied the Patristic sources.]

As others have pointed out, Dom Gueranger was a scholar and he knew more about Scripture AND Tradition than most of us posting on this thread combined.  He very likely had in mind various commentaries from the Fathers on this matter, with which he was very well acquainted.

St. Jerome rightly points out that the reason this was done was due to the charge brought against him by the Jєωs, that He was the King of the Jєωs.  So the Jєωs are responsible for the incident.

He had been styled King of the Jєωs, and the Scribes and Priests had brought this charge against Him, that He claimed sovereignty over the Jєωιѕн nation; hence this mockery of the soldiers, taking away His own garments, they put on Him a scarlet cloak to represent that purple fringe which kings of old used to wear, for the diadem they put on Him a crown of thorns, and for the regal sceptre give Him a reed, and perform adoration to Him as to a king.

When Pilate attached the "King of the Jєωs" to the crucifix, that was due to the Roman legal requirement to list the charges, the reason for which a man was being crucified on the cross.  Those were the charges brought by the Jєωs, and the charges were undoubtedly handed over the Roman who were given orders to scourge Our Lord.  So what happened is that they saw the charges and proceeded to perform this mockery of Him as a direct result of the "Jєωιѕн insolence" as Cornelius a Lapide described it.

So you limit "Revelation" to Scripture alone?  Have you studied what the Church Fathers may have said about the matter?

[Your post above implies Sola Scriptura.  Perhaps you should withhold judgment that Dom Gueranger was in error until you've studied the Patristic sources.]

As others have pointed out, Dom Gueranger was a scholar and he knew more about Scripture AND Tradition than most of us posting on this thread combined.  He very likely had in mind various commentaries from the Fathers on this matter, with which he was very well acquainted.

What stupidity.  

Please rebut the citation I included, and save me your emotional conjecture.