Altar Rail and Communion Times

[smndtupidisaftr]

So I just had a thought right now thinking about the other thread about EMHC’s and the justification for their use referencing the abundance of people attending Masses and how long Communion would take. Examining the logistics of how Communion is distributed, I think I may have found what causes the problem, and that is not using an altar rail.

I thought about it this way. In a regular Communion line, you have one person distributing and a line going to that one person. Once someone receives, that person moves out of the way and the next person steps up. There are two events that have to happen before the next reception can occur. In other words, there is a large gap in between each person receiving Communion. Now compare this to the situation with an altar rail. Everyone is already lined up at the rail ready to receive. The priest comes by, distributes, and then moves on. He does not have to wait for the person to leave or another person to come back. All he has to do is move on to the next person. Sure, he has to move, but he has to move a very short distance.

It is just something to think about. Our removal of altar rails seems to contribute to the need for EMHC’s. I realize that bringing back altar rails would not eliminate the need for EMHC’s entirely because of our lack of priests, but we do not need nearly as many as we have now.

God bless!

 

[Matthew_Holford]

So I just had a thought right now thinking about the other thread about EMHC’s and the justification for their use referencing the abundance of people attending Masses and how long Communion would take. Examining the logistics of how Communion is distributed, I think I may have found what causes the problem, and that is not using an altar rail.

I thought about it this way. In a regular Communion line, you have one person distributing and a line going to that one person. Once someone receives, that person moves out of the way and the next person steps up. There are two events that have to happen before the next reception can occur. In other words, there is a large gap in between each person receiving Communion. Now compare this to the situation with an altar rail. Everyone is already lined up at the rail ready to receive. The priest comes by, distributes, and then moves on. He does not have to wait for the person to leave or another person to come back. All he has to do is move on to the next person. Sure, he has to move, but he has to move a very short distance.

It is just something to think about. Our removal of altar rails seems to contribute to the need for EMHC’s. I realize that bringing back altar rails would not eliminate the need for EMHC’s entirely because of our lack of priests, but we do not need nearly as many as we have now.

God bless!

I completely agree with you. It does work as there is a parish, near my mother’s, which has altar rails and does what you describe.

 

[YoungTradCath]

The unfortunate practices complement each other.

I’ve always asked but never received an answer to my question, “How did they do it in a timely manner before VII?” Of course, I already know the answer, but I want people to prove themselves wrong by answering that.

The fact is, we already have a manner of distributing that moves with a very good level of expediency, firmly rooted in the tradition of the Roman Rite. Why we don’t commonly use it I can only wonder. Perhaps a way to lessen the unworthiness aspect.

It feels so unnatural to stand to receive communion. To me, it feels like, “HEY, let’s go get some God out of that cup thing.” I’d kneel at the OF, but I don’t want to cause distraction. As Fr. Z says, save the liturgy, save the world. I’m eagerly awaiting what the priests and bishops of my generation (of which I may be one) are going to do in their presbyteral tenures and ecclesiastical reigns when that time comes.

 

[Brendan]

In our parish, we use pairs of prei deiu.

That works our very well, as even the movement of the priest is removed. The priest remains stationary, while the recipient kneels on one of the two prei deiu.

The priest offers them Holy Communion and then they stand up and another kneels in their place.

While this is happening, the priest is offering Communion to the person in the neighboring prei deiu.

There are two altarboys with patens, one to each prie deiu, so the altar boy does not need to cross over with the paten.

very VERY efficent. We have about 950 families in our parish, with about 1200 at each of the main Sunday Masses.

With the celebrant and the other priest offering Holy Communion at these stations, and the Deacon bringing Holy Communion to the elderly in their pews, the offering of Hoiy Communion takes less time than much larger parishes with their veritable armies of EMHC’s

Oh yea, the priests offer Holy Communion intincted, so both species are commonly recieved.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

In our parish, we use pairs of prei deiu.

I was thinking about this since with altar rails the priest eventually needs to go back to the other end. What you described seems like the most efficient form possible.

 

[PrayForMeStJude]

I agree that using altar rails cuts down on communion time, especially if multiple priests or deacons handle each section.

However, the issue of timing is based, in part, on a false assumption: that all those people should be receiving at all! How many people in the pews haven’t been to confession in years? How many don’t accept all the teachings of the Church? How many don’t even understand what they’re doing?

Communion in even the largest parish wouldn’t take more than only a few minutes if Priests would start catechizing on who can receive.

 

[pilots13]

The flaw with communion rails, is 1) most churches either took them out, or never had them to begin with. and 2) the lack of people giving communion. When I go to a church with a huge crowd, there are 8 to 10 communion ministers handing out just the hosts (and this isn’t counting the chalices) You go back to the communion rail, there’s no way you can fit that many ministers along it. And say you cut it down to 2, you still have to include the laity, cause most churches don’t have more than 1 priest these days.

I really don’t see how someone receiving the host, stepping aside as the next person steps forward is really any slower than the priest giving the host, and then having to step aside to the next person.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I agree that using altar rails cuts down on communion time, especially if multiple priests or deacons handle each section.

However, the issue of timing is based, in part, on a false assumption: that all those people should be receiving at all! How many people in the pews haven’t been to confession in years? How many don’t accept all the teachings of the Church? How many don’t even understand what they’re doing?

Communion in even the largest parish wouldn’t take more than only a few minutes if Priests would start catechizing on who can receive.

That is a rash judgement to which you should not rush. You might like to read this.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

The flaw with communion rails, is 1) most churches either took them out, or never had them to begin with. and 2) the lack of people giving communion. When I go to a church with a huge crowd, there are 8 to 10 communion ministers handing out just the hosts (and this isn’t counting the chalices) You go back to the communion rail, there’s no way you can fit that many ministers along it. And say you cut it down to 2, you still have to include the laity, cause most churches don’t have more than 1 priest these days.

I really don’t see how someone receiving the host, stepping aside as the next person steps forward is really any slower than the priest giving the host, and then having to step aside to the next person.

It really needs to be seen to understand it. It is a very efficient method of distributing the Holy Communion.

 

[YoungTradCath]

I agree that using altar rails cuts down on communion time, especially if multiple priests or deacons handle each section.

However, the issue of timing is based, in part, on a false assumption: that all those people should be receiving at all! How many people in the pews haven’t been to confession in years? How many don’t accept all the teachings of the Church? How many don’t even understand what they’re doing?

Communion in even the largest parish wouldn’t take more than only a few minutes if Priests would start catechizing on who can receive.

I don’t think its worthwhile to place an estimate on how many people are not disposed to receive communion, but it most certainly happens, and happening once is happening too much. I fully agree that it needs to be a point of stress regularly in homilies and in other methods of catechesis the necessary components of proper Eucharistic disposition. I would add to that by saying, in every parish that can do it, a priest should be available before and during all masses to hear confessions.

The flaw with communion rails, is 1) most churches either took them out, or never had them to begin with. and 2) the lack of people giving communion. When I go to a church with a huge crowd, there are 8 to 10 communion ministers handing out just the hosts (and this isn’t counting the chalices) You go back to the communion rail, there’s no way you can fit that many ministers along it. And say you cut it down to 2, you still have to include the laity, cause most churches don’t have more than 1 priest these days.

I really don’t see how someone receiving the host, stepping aside as the next person steps forward is really any slower than the priest giving the host, and then having to step aside to the next person.

1. First, many took them out; don’t know about most. Second, any built before VII had them, which is probably the majority of current churches, and even some after VII (continuing to grow in popularity in light of the “trad revival”) are building them.
2. Again, I ask, “How was it managed to be done efficiently before VII?” Certainly most average masses didn’t take more than an hour before then. Definitely not for a weekday Low Mass. There needn’t be more than one minister (the priest) of communion when using an altar rail. The people line up, the priest says the phrase, the communicant responds, place on tongue, priest moves to the right and repeats. After each person receives, pop up, go back to pew. Next person in line fills that space at altar rail. When the priest gets to the end of the altar rail, he goes back to the other end and starts again, like a typewriter. It’s all very beautiful in its simplicity, reverence, fluidity and amazing time efficiency. I’ve been to one OF mass with about 300 people and communion took like 9-10 minutes, with altar rail.

 

[michaelmas]

The only issue to the above arguments is the elderly and those that are unable to kneel do to physically disability. Other then those 2 instances I see no reason not to have a communion rail. You don’t need both the wine and bread, one or the other is enough.

I also think the alter boys need to be there to protect the host if dropped.

I was walking back to my pew and on the way there was a host on the ground. I immediately picked it up, covered it, and walked it back to Father.

Another reason communion may seem longer today then yesterday is the lack of knowledge of acceptable reception. It isn’t easy being sin free at communion time and when I was a member of the Pius V group a lot of times 1/4 of the congregation did not receive. Today it is rare to see more then 5 people out of 500 not receive.

 

[YoungTradCath]

The only issue to the above arguments is the elderly and those that are unable to kneel do to physically disability. Other then those 2 instances I see no reason not to have a communion rail. You don’t need both the wine and bread, one or the other is enough.

I also think the alter boys need to be there to protect the host if dropped.

I was walking back to my pew and on the way there was a host on the ground. I immediately picked it up, covered it, and walked it back to Father.

Another reason communion may seem longer today then yesterday is the lack of knowledge of acceptable reception. It isn’t easy being sin free at communion time and when I was a member of the Pius V group a lot of times 1/4 of the congregation did not receive. Today it is rare to see more then 5 people out of 500 not receive.

When communion rails were the only form in the Roman Rite to administer Holy Communion, and in those churches that still prefer it today, it was and is acceptable for the elderly or infirm to stand to receive communion, or to have it delivered to them at their pew. In fact, at my non-rail using parish, the priest routinely goes to give Communion to an old woman who can’t walk well at her pew.

It is traditional, indeed I have never seen it not done, and it is required in the EF, to have a paten (or, in the old days, the corporal itself), held underneath the chin of all those receiving Communion at the rail.

 

[PrayForMeStJude]

That is a rash judgement to which you should not rush. You might like to read this.

[edited]

I know what Canon 915 says. I recently spoke with a canon lawyer about it, as well.

I didn’t say anything contrary to Church teaching, or that canon [edited].

 

[Brendan]

The only issue to the above arguments is the elderly and those that are unable to kneel do to physically disability. .

That one is easy. Even in pre Vat II days, they stood to recieve.

At our parish (with the Prei deiu) they do the same. Instead of kneeling at the prei deiu, they walk up to it and stand.

 

[Chatter163]

Note to thread. Spelling is prie-dieu, which is French for pray (to) God.

 

[pilots13]

"Matthew Holford:

It really needs to be seen to understand it. It is a very efficient method of distributing the Holy Communion.

I have been to several Masses at a couple churches that still used them. I’m not saying it is inefficient, but I wouldn’t say it’s any more efficient than the processional line.

1. First, many took them out; don’t know about most. Second, any built before VII had them, which is probably the majority of current churches, and even some after VII (continuing to grow in popularity in light of the “trad revival”) are building them.

Out of the 16 churches that are in my part of town, 3 is brand new (built in the last 3-5 years) and though two are very traditional looking (one even has a high Altar), none have communion rails. 10 are over 50 years old and were built with rails. Out of those 4 still have their rails, one still uses it (and it’s the parish that’s closing due to recent Archdiocese restructuring). The rest were built in the middle and have never had rails either. That’s just where I’m coming from. Oh and one of the churches with the rails still that doesn’t use them is the Cathedral.

 

[Filii_Dei]

As much as I would love for the return of altar rails (amongst many other traditions), we should avoid thinking of it as some kind of solution to long communion durations. The benefits are but marginal in this respect, and it still won’t approach the kind of time savings that are achieved by the doubling, tripling or even quadrupling of the number of ministers of communion. Any comparison would only really make sense if the number of communion ministers remain the same, but the intent of this thread is to draw a link with the need for EMHCs with the loss of altar rails, which I find to be rather tenuous. By far, whether or not we like the concept, using EMHCs still radically cuts down on the duration of communion.

I think we’re also forgetting this, but during communion, the primary limiting factor isn’t how fast the person can get on or off the kneeler but how fast the priest can say “The body of Christ. Amen.”, or in the TLM, “Corpus Dómini nostri Jesu Christi custódiat ánimam tuam in vitam æternam. Amen.” in a reverential manner before he administers the Eucharist. The latter is an obvious mouthful, and again, even if altar rails were more efficient, it alone won’t improve much on communion times when for the most part the communicant is standing or kneeling in place while the priest is finishing his pronouncement.

In any case, the amount of time that is saved shouldn’t be what we’re worried about, instead we should be focusing upon giving proper information of the significance and importance of altar rails. In my view, they should not be dispensed with, regardless of whether they actually improve communion times.

 

[liturgyluver]

It feels so unnatural to stand to receive communion. To me, it feels like, “HEY, let’s go get some God out of that cup thing.” I’d kneel at the OF, but I don’t want to cause distraction. As Fr. Z says, save the liturgy, save the world. I’m eagerly awaiting what the priests and bishops of my generation (of which I may be one) are going to do in their presbyteral tenures and ecclesiastical reigns when that time comes.

I agree with you completely. For me the length of time that distribution takes is not the issue, but it feels so much more reverant to receive kneeling at an altar rail, and it looks more dignified too. In my neck of the woods almost all the churches have dispensed with their altar rails but, thankfully, there are a few left.

 

[lizaanne]

I was thinking about this since with altar rails the priest eventually needs to go back to the other end. What you described seems like the most efficient form possible.

I’ve been to Brendan’s parish, and yes, this works very well for a parish that does not have a communion rail.

It really is faster to have everyone just ready and kneeling ready to receive. And so much faster and more efficient for the priest - and best of all, eliminates the need for an army of EMHCs.

And as for the elderly and infirm situation — that is an entirely false argument. They just stand to receive.

~Liza

 

[Phemie]

It really needs to be seen to understand it. It is a very efficient method of distributing the Holy Communion.

It wouldn’t be quite as efficient today as it used to be since the priest still has to say " The body of Christ," and wait for the response, something he didn’t have to do when we were kids, he just kept repeating the Latin phrase and kept walking.