Communion Rails

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='dells_of_bittersweet' timestamp='1338171256' post='2436083']
It feels to me that they rope off Jesus and make him seem not approachable.
[/quote]

Properly understood it is ok and good to think of Jesus as being 'roped off' or even locked up as a prisoner. Because He is the Divine Prisoner of the Tabernacle.

[img]http://i49.tinypic.com/mvjehd.jpg[/img]


“The Divine Prisoner of the tabernacle awaits the visit and the gratitude of his creatures who abandon him! He knocks at the door of our heart to make of it a tabernacle where he can rest” - St. Therese of Lisieux

Edited May 28, 2012 by KnightofChrist

[cappie]

The proper form or prayer for the reception of Holy Communion according to the EF is :Corpus Dómini nostri Jesu Christi custódiat ánimam tuam in vitam æternam. Amen. This is said by the priest and should be said before giving Holy Communion to each person. In my experience as an Altar Server in what has now become called the EF the priest sometimes would give communion to 3 or 4 people for each prayer. Besides the Eucharistic Fast was from Midnight and also included fasting from water(this was changed by Pope PiusXII) so many people did not go to Holy Communion at later Masses. The precept of the Church said one must HEAR Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation. But one only had to go to Holy Communion once a year. The practice of regular and frequent Communion was one of the 20th Century.

BTW I thought this thread was about the Altar Rail not a discussion on the merits of reception of Holy Communion.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1338244210' post='2436604']
Thanks. It does stand to reason that not having all the EMHCs would eliminate much time, not otherwise needed. The celebrant would not have to take the time to hand out the vessels to the EMHC and spend time cleaning all of them. Not to mention eliminating potential abuse, such as EMHC self administering, which I have witnessed.

Sorry for my ignorance, but what is the PCED?
[/quote]

The Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia Dei

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1338242781' post='2436584']


Thanks. The indult makes sense. I just pulled 90 minutes out of the air really to point out people get upset if the mass goes longer than 1 hour.
[/quote]The priest who celebrated our nuptial Mass used to be in the Caribbean. He said they got upset if Mass was an hour or shorter.

[Lil'Monster]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1338180312' post='2436227']
i think you are tired from the retreat. go.to.bed.
[/quote]

You are so right and as the matter of fact I went to bed before you replied..

Edited May 29, 2012 by Lil'Monster

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Lil'Monster' timestamp='1338254725' post='2436793']
You are so right and as the matter of fact I went to bed before you replied..
[/quote]
haha
(don't really wanna hijack, but i hope the retreat was an excellent experience!)

[kujo]

Wait, this thread hasn't been hijacked by the "traditional vs modern church architecture" crowd? Progress on Phatmass! Hooray!

[Groo the Wanderer]

modern church architecture IS traditional. take a look at those constructed in the last 10 years. lotsa neo-baroque happening.

the hippy years are gone and so are the hideous designs...


this one opened a few months ago in my diocese:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBZQ3udkvDw/TuO3MX8bX2I/AAAAAAAAAwE/ZPl647lmS-0/s1600/Vietnamese+Martyers.JPG

http://site.catholicfavors.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Vietnamese-Martyrs-Catholic-Church.jpg

[kujo]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1338259626' post='2436851']
modern church architecture IS traditional. take a look at those constructed in the last 10 years. lotsa neo-baroque happening.

the hippy years are gone and so are the hideous designs...


this one opened a few months ago in my diocese:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBZQ3udkvDw/TuO3MX8bX2I/AAAAAAAAAwE/ZPl647lmS-0/s1600/Vietnamese+Martyers.JPG

http://site.catholicfavors.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Vietnamese-Martyrs-Catholic-Church.jpg
[/quote]

razzle dazzle. I like when I can understand your posts

[Groo the Wanderer]

me too :-)

[ThePenciledOne]

Honestly I like the the Byznatium Rite idea for the alter/sancutary....

[Lil'Monster]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1338257618' post='2436809']
haha
(don't really wanna hijack, but i hope the retreat was an excellent experience!)
[/quote]

It was an excellent experience!

[Aloysius]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1338268632' post='2436957']
Honestly I like the the Byznatium Rite idea for the alter/sancutary....
[/quote]indeed, having an iconostasis to separate the sanctuary is very beautiful, or a rood screen in the western tradition, though that has all but vanished from the earth. I have sometimes mused at an Eastern Divine Liturgy about the connection to accounts I have read of ancient liturgies, in which the congregation would have often been sitting in a different room than the priest (everyone in both rooms facing Eastward, obviously). the tradition of separating the sanctuary from the congregation runs very deep in our liturgical history, what remains of that in our churches is the elevation of the sanctuary and sometimes the communion rail. I understand the sentiment that one wishes to have Christ more intimate to the people, but there is a time and place for expressing his intimate closeness to us, and a time and place for expressing his transcendence. interestingly enough, when we go to the communion rail itself is the very moment that those two characteristics meet: you go kneel at the "rope" that "ropes off" Jesus, as it were, and meet Him in the most intimate way possible. I can think of no better symbol to express this than the altar rail.


Papist, Universae Ecclesiae 28 clarifies that Summorum Pontificum has special force of law that derogates from provisions of the law that are incompatible with the 1962 rubrics. I'll let Fr. Z explain:

[quote]"UE 28: Furthermore, by virtue of its character of [b]special law,[/b] within its own area, the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum [b]derogates [/b]from those provisions of law, connected with the sacred Rites, promulgated [b]from 1962 onwards and incompatible with the rubrics of the liturgical books in effect in 1962[/b]."

Derogate means that things are partially replaced, set aside. So, insofar as the use of the 1962 books is concerned, if there is something that came into law [i]after[/i] 1962, and that thing or practice [i]conflicts[/i] with what is in the 1962 books, then those later, post-1962 things [i]don’t apply to the use of the 1962 books[/i]. -Fr. Z
[/quote]

I believe the Ecclesia Dei commmission has answered questions clarifying that this interpretation is correct, that communion standing and in the hand is not permitted at the Extraordinary Form, as the 1962 rubrics call for kneeling and receiving on the tongue. nor are EMHC or altar girls permitted in the Extraordinary Form.

I realize that's a bit off-topic, but I think it's important to see where communion rails are most used currently and for that I wished to clarify the law as it stands. but I go back to my point that a communion rail is, in essence, the perfect symbol of union between transcendence and intimacy, because it does separate the sanctuary from the altar in a very visible way, but it represents the point at which the sanctuary comes down to us to be with us. and in liturgies where the comunion rail is not used, I still see it as this (though not as striking, the altar rail's symbolic significant is obviously dampened when it is not actually used for the distribution of communion)--because we witness the priest bring Christ through it like a threshold, and in that moment we see the symbolic way in which Christ descends from His transcendence to His people.

[Papist]

Thanks Al.

[RandomProddy]

As a fellowship post (not to stir trouble but to increase understanding...)

Some anglican churches have recently started distributing communion standing rather than kneeling at a communion rail (some have started by passing the elements round with the congregation seated in the pews!?!?!) but I've always thought of kneeling being the action done before a king.

1/ Does RC theology teach that receiving on the tongue is better because the hands are more unclean? (I'm thinking of the whole "it is not what goes into the mouth that makes a man unclean,"...)

2/ One part of the liturgy I particularly love is the phrase "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you. But only say the word, and I shall be healed" - usually included after the Agnus Dei (if it's included.) Does the RC church use this?

Thanks guys!

Edited May 30, 2012 by RandomProddy

[MissScripture]

[quote name='RandomProddy' timestamp='1338339257' post='2437521']
As a fellowship post (not to stir trouble but to increase understanding...)

Some anglican churches have recently started distributing communion standing rather than kneeling at a communion rail (some have started by passing the elements round with the congregation seated in the pews!?!?!) but I've always thought of kneeling being the action done before a king.

1/ Does RC theology teach that receiving on the tongue is better because the hands are more unclean? (I'm thinking of the whole "it is not what goes into the mouth that makes a man unclean,"...)

2/ One part of the liturgy I particularly love is the phrase "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you. But only say the word, and I shall be healed" - usually included after the Agnus Dei (if it's included.) Does the RC church use this?

Thanks guys!
[/quote]
1) I'm not sure

2) We did, but it's recently (at the beginning of Advent, when we started using the new translation) it's been changed to, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof. Only say the word and my soul shall be healed."

[Amppax]

[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1338339469' post='2437525']
2) We did, but it's recently (at the beginning of Advent, when we started using the new translation) it's been changed to, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof. Only say the word and my soul shall be healed."
[/quote]

And this was done to more accurately reflect Scripture. This refers to the story of Jesus healing the servant of the centurion.

[CMoon72]

Hey y'all....

Just a thought...and I haven't read every single post, so if I'm saying the same thing as someone else, by all means ignore me.

But...

I do see the altar rail as separating the faithful from priest, but that's ok. Because if we look at just what the priest is doing up there in the sanctuary, his actions really don't have a lot to do with us in the pews. He's there to offer the Mass, we're there to worship. We participate internally first and we participate externally second. So, whether there is a separation by an altar rail or not should matter not. Since the altar rail is part of the immemorial way of receiving Holy Communion, shouldn't we strive to live out that custom? I mean standing to receive sure looks Protestant to me. To be honest, it reminds me of going to my aunt's Baptist church.

All of that being said, if the Mass is an imperfect view of the "heavenly liturgy" shouldn't it be cordoned off? Shouldn't it be held as something "other worldly?" In my experience, it sure seems that the new Mass and lack of separation tries to make the whole experience more human and that sure doesn't seem to be the point. At least not from anything I've ever read. I've been presented with it a little bit that way from the Christian Bros., but I've challenged them on it in class and ultimately they do agree, but it seems like they don't want to.

Another thing that sure seems like to me is that by removing the altar rail, it is changing the theology of the Mass and Eucharistic theology. Changing the theology of the Mass insofar as it makes the Mass a more human experience, as opposed to divine. Also, taking the altar rail away sure seems to lessen the event of receiving Holy Communion. I know that at one time there was an indult for receiving in the hand, but hasn't that expired and that was not renewed, right? I also know that standing is now the norm, but standing sure seems to remove part of the worship aspect.

Maybe I'm just a crazy Southern hack, but it sure seems that removing and/or not using the altar rails, sure Protestantizes the Mass...what do y'all think?

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1338339469' post='2437525']
2) We did, but it's recently (at the beginning of Advent, when we started using the new translation) it's been changed [b]back[/b] to, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof. Only say the word and my soul shall be healed."
[/quote]


corrected....

[PhuturePriest]

I LOVE Communion Rails. They're beautiful, and I do not feel they block me from Jesus, but rather they are a reminder of who is in my midst and what I should be doing. Besides, regular lay-people shouldn't be on the altar in the first place unless they have a specific reason anyway. I used to go on it quite a bit because my family used to clean the Church, but that is basically the only experience I have ever had walking on the altar.