Demolishment of Altar Rails

[MagdalenaRita]

Fasting, almsgiving and prayer have been considered pillars of the Christian life since the early Church.

“Do you wish your prayer to fly toward God? Give it two wings: fasting and almsgiving.”
—Saint Augustine

self-denial and almsgiving have usually been meant to complement prayer and to form one unified response

Yes, this is true and I completely agree.

 

[PetraG]

Yes, this is true and I completely agree.

I didn’t take you to mean it was an either/or thing, but that–the two things being fundamentally different–it is a both/and matter.

 

[rangerdillon]

Our parish installed a new altar rail last year. At some point next year, the high altar restored to it’s original design. We have a great pastor, generous parishioners making this possible. The fact that the company that made the original altar is still in business is a great benefit.

 

[PetraG]

Ultimately there is an arbitrariness about utilizing an altar rail or not. As we have seen, good reasons and appealing metaphors can be put forth to persuade that an altar rail is “good”. But the same can be done for the absence of a barrier. It is within the purview of those who decided to remove them to do so. And it’s our individual right to like the decision or to dislike it. With that, let it go…

I don’t look at it as a barrier, but as a structure that makes distribution of Holy Communion to people who are kneeling a lot more practical.

Speaking of practicality, for instance, I agree with the method by which Holy Communion is brought first to people who cannot walk or kneel (with any hope of getting up again and not falling, at least) and then distributed to the fully ambulatory at the front of church afterwards. This makes sense, as the people who have difficulty kneeling are often the same ones who have trouble standing for long or walking very far.

 

[Rau]

I don’t look at it as a barrier, but as a structure that makes distribution of Holy Communion to people who are kneeling a lot more practical.

Here then is a 3rd perspective and no doubt there are more.

 

[Maximus1]

Ontologically we are not. I already said that. So did JOHN OF THE CROSS.
The rest feel free to learn Catholic orthodoxy on your own.

 

[PetraG]

Here then is a 3rd perspective and no doubt there are more.

Yes. Few questions are really covered by one of two or even three points on the opinion spectrum.

Ultimately there is an arbitrariness about utilizing an altar rail or not.

I’d say there are trade-offs. The opinions aren’t arbitrary, but depend on what one feels willing to trade for what. As you point out, there is a spiritual benefit to accepting the benefits of whatever situation you get and trying not to spend to much energy on mourning whatever benefits are lost at the same time. I’m not criticizing anyone who advocates one way or the other; I’m just agreeing that someone is going to have to be obedient to the situation no matter what the situation is in the end. The decision is rarely arbitrary, but if you get what you don’t like when there are good reasons for what you like, it can sure seem like it. As you imply, this gives an opportunity for obedience. Surely, humble obedience is also a penance pleasing to the Lord. It is OK to ask for what you want; just be willing to accept what you get.

 

[Brendan_64]

If it is a deep core part of the Faith, why was it relaxed? You are of course free to disagree, but I tend look at overemphasis on such things as similar to keeping the letter, but not necessarily the spirit, of the law.

You seem to be making the implication that people who value pious practices are somehow ignoring the spirit of the law? To me you seem to be propagating a stereotype that people who value pious practices such as fasting, abstinence etc are somehow missing a point and don’t love their neighbour as much as those who don’t value such practices. Would you also include in this pious practices such as First Saturday devotions, First Friday devotions, wearing the Brown Scapular, wearing Miraculous medals, saying the Rosary even. Where do you stop? Praying the Stations of the Cross, praying novenas,? Does Divine Mercy Sunday also come under this category? Do plenary or partial indulgences count as pious practices? Or should we just forget all of that stuff and we would therefore become more loving people as a result?

 

[Maximus1]

Love one another as I have loved you.
THIS IS HOW THEY WILL KNOW YOU ARE MY DISCIPLES.

 

[Maximus1]

Don’t make me guess!

 

[PetraG]

You seem to be making the implication that people who value pious practices are somehow ignoring the spirit of the law? To me you seem to be propagating a stereotype that people who value pious practices such as fasting, abstinence etc are somehow missing a point and don’t love their neighbour as much as those who don’t value such practices. Would you also include in this pious practices such as First Saturday devotions, First Friday devotions, wearing the Brown Scapular, wearing Miraculous medals, saying the Rosary even. Where do you stop? Praying the Stations of the Cross, praying novenas,? Does Divine Mercy Sunday also come under this category? Do plenary or partial indulgences count as pious practices? Or should we just forget all of that stuff and we would therefore become more loving people as a result?

I took it to be a caution against emphasizing one area–sacraments, prayer, self-denial, almsgiving–at the expense of others. These are pillars of the faith, meant to work together to form one’s soul.

Yes, I think the saints have cautioned against exterior acts of piety or religion, not in an of themselves, but when these good things are allowed to supplant more substantial acts. An example would be always going to church and doing all the motions perfectly but not supporting the work of the Church with time outside of liturgy or with material support etc.

 

[Maximus1]

My implication is that Catholics of every age misperceive Church teaching at times. Sometimes it is an unintended consequence, sometimes perhaps something in our nature’s. And other times our consumer based zero sum economy and culture is to blame. And if the Church sees it, after a while, a correction is needed. There need not be an academic mistake to trigger the misperception.
Loving your enemy, as Jesus taught, is core Christianity I would say every aspect of our social and political life causes lots of excuses for not actually doing.

 

[Maximus1]

I don’t think I implied that idea so perhaps you can refer me to where you think I did.

 

[Brendan_64]

I took it to be a caution against emphasizing one area–sacraments, prayer, self-denial, almsgiving–at the expense of others. These are pillars of the faith, meant to work together to form one’s soul.

Yes, I think the saints have cautioned against exterior acts of piety or religion, not in an of themselves, but when these good things are allowed to supplant more substantial acts. An example would be always going to church and doing all the motions perfectly but not supporting the work of the Church with time outside of liturgy or with material support etc.

I can agree with the bulk of that. However the assumption should not be made that people who value pious practices are somehow less charitable and loving to others than those who do not seem to value such practices.

 

[Maximus1]

You spoke for me. And thanks.
Not eating meat on Friday is infinitely easier than loving ones enemies. Which really requires a total overhaul and Christ-like ethic before it is even possible.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Love one another as I have loved you.
THIS IS HOW THEY WILL KNOW YOU ARE MY DISCIPLES.

?. We are also called to love Christ and how do we show our love to Christ?.Loving our neighbor, absolutely but we can do that with our pious practices also.

Not eating meet on Friday is infinitely easier than loving ones enemies. Which really requires a total overhaul and Christ-like ethic before it is even possible.

Not always. Be in a family where not everyone is Catholic and everyone else wants meat on Fridays and see how easy it is or at work where everyone is ordering out and the only choice is meat, so you go get a grilled cheese while everyone else is having pizza or something else very delicious.

Why does it have to be an either or. Can’t we love our neighbor and give up meat on Fridays in commemoration of Christ’s death?

Ontologically we are not. I already said that.

Sorry, just wanted to add that your posts sounded as if you were implying we were equal with God.

 

[Brendan_64]

The Eucharist is the core of our faith, it is the source and summit of our Christian life. Loving our fellow man is clearly so very important, but I believe love of God comes before love of our fellow man. When Christ was asked what the greatest commandment was he answered first to love God, then after that he said to love your fellow man. Clearly though, we need to do both.

 

[Maximus1]

I didn’t use the word equal. I pretty much quoted Saints and church fathers. Which tells you really how important the doctrine is and how radical it is. In fact it is what makes the news GOOD NEWS.
I also think we find it very difficult to imagine God has destined us for such a gift. The refractory tone people seem to take I think is the overwhelming nature of our place in God’s plan.

 

[Maximus1]

Love of God clearly comes first. God comes first and when they say God is love, that is the source of all love.

 

[stpurl]

Exactly. A both-and, not an either-or.

I also think that stereotyping older Catholics as rooted in outdated and essentially seen as ‘show’ practices while ignoring the supposed ‘real deal’ of loving one’s neighbor is not helpful to anybody. I don’t stereotype YOUNG Catholics (or any other age) as being more this or less that, so I find it troublesome to see it elsewhere, as I think you do too.