Communion rails

[fantrl]

Often times on CA, I’ll hear people praising the return of communion rails, which essentially force people to kneel and return on the tongue. While I prefer receiving the Eucharist while kneeling, which I do when I go to the Tridentine Mass, wouldn’t altar-rail-communion in the Novus Ordo Mass in the United States be a liturgical abuse? US GIRM 160 says “The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.” People complain when someone is denied communion kneeling (outside of the norm), but how is that any different than someone being denied communion standing (which is the norm)?

 

[lontas]

If any church forces people to kneel at the rail to receive (and does not have a special dispensation to do this, as some churches do), then that would indeed be a form of liturgical abuse. Any behavior at Mass that blatantly disobeys the GIRM is liturgical abuse.

However, I think what many of these posters mean is for the specifications to be revised to allow for more widespread use of the communion rails. Many people see kneeling and receiving on the tongue to be more reverent. I don’t think they are calling for us all to openly engage in disobeying the magisterium of the Church. Rather, they are asking for the bishops to take this into consideration for future revision. Oh, and just so you know, I am unbiased in this issue; I for one am happy to receive Jesus in whatever form the Church deems acceptable.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Often times on CA, I’ll hear people praising the return of communion rails, which essentially force people to kneel and return on the tongue. While I prefer receiving the Eucharist while kneeling, which I do when I go to the Tridentine Mass, wouldn’t altar-rail-communion in the Novus Ordo Mass in the United States be a liturgical abuse? US GIRM 160 says “The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.” People complain when someone is denied communion kneeling (outside of the norm), but how is that any different than someone being denied communion standing (which is the norm)?

Communion rails do not “force” someone to kneel or receive only on the tongue. They do however offer a safe option for those who wish to receive this way.

 

[netmilsmom]

Often times on CA, I’ll hear people praising the return of communion rails, which essentially force people to kneel and return on the tongue. While I prefer receiving the Eucharist while kneeling, which I do when I go to the Tridentine Mass, wouldn’t altar-rail-communion in the Novus Ordo Mass in the United States be a liturgical abuse? US GIRM 160 says “The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.” People complain when someone is denied communion kneeling (outside of the norm), but how is that any different than someone being denied communion standing (which is the norm)?

We have kneelers for distribution by intinction. People still stand when they can’t or choose not to kneel.
I don’t see a problem.

 

[Eireann]

If it’s not broke don’t fix it, we wouldn’t be having all this Communion on the hand/tongue discussion if the rails had been left alone.
And we wouldn’t be risking the chance of some bringing Hosts away with them to take part in their demonic rituals, even heard stories of Hosts been swept up, ridiculous.