How is organic development supposed to happen?

[ethelzguy]

Another example would be the evolution of that piece of architecture which divides the congregation from the altar. In the East this naturally developed into the ornate Iconostasis, while in the West it developed into the communion rail. In both cases it has its origin in early Christianity, and arguably old Jewish temple worship. This is an excellent example of organic growth because it also highlights the importance and validity of the various rites. To know the importance of this piece of architecture, one needs only to ask an Easterner how important the iconostasis is. It makes as much sense to remove altar rails in the West, as it does to remove the iconostasis in the East.

So, if someone ADDED a Communion rail centuries ago, it’s organic, but if someone takes it out centuries later, it’s inorganic and wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Freshman88]

So, if someone ADDED a Communion rail centuries ago, it’s organic, but if someone takes it out centuries later, it’s inorganic and wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Does it respect the identity and characteristics of our rite or not?

The presence of a divider between the altar and the congregation has existed for the overwhelming majority of our liturgical history (having its origin in Hebrew worship). It also exists in multiple rites, including the Eastern rites.

It would be artifical/inorganic to promote its removal. Just ask an Easterner how they would feel if their Iconostais was taken away. More importantly, ask an Eastern theologian about the consequences of such an act. Overall the East has a much better grasp on liturgy.

[Be aware that it is common for Ethelz to ignore arguments, and to engage in petty polemics that serve to only upset other posters]

 

[ethelzguy]

Does it respect the identity and characteristics of our rite or not?

The presence of a divider between the altar and the congregation has existed for the overwhelming majority of our liturgical history (having its origin in Hebrew worship). It also exists in multiple rites, including the Eastern rites.

It would be artifical/inorganic to promote its removal. Just ask an Easterner how they would feel if their Iconostais was taken away. More importantly, ask an Eastern theologian about the consequences of such an act. Overall the East has a much better grasp on liturgy.

[Be aware that it is common for Ethelz to ignore arguments, and to engage in petty polemics that serve to only upset other posters]

I’m not ignoring anything. I’m simply pointing out the hypocracies in the arguments I read here daily.

If it suits your argument, great, if not, well then, it’s irrelevant, right?

 

[Sarpedon]

For instance, sacred silence was a characteristic of our Roman rite. Yet all of sudden we have changed to “active participation” of the laity. Thus the original characteristic of sacred silence has been lost, and this change can be deemed inorganic.

But the church allowed it. Did the church lead us astray?

 

[Freshman88]

If it suits your argument, great, if not, well then, it’s irrelevant, right?

Yes, clearly that’s what I’m arguing.

 

[Freshman88]

But the church allowed it. Did the church lead us astray?

I don’t like to think about such things. I simply attend mass, pray and study.

 

[Our_Refuge]

So, if someone ADDED a Communion rail centuries ago, it’s organic, but if someone takes it out centuries later, it’s inorganic and wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

The only reason the communion rail was taken out was to accomadate communion in the hand while standing. It is not organic growth. Plus removing the rail is optional, some OF Churches still have them. Organic growth cannot be optional.

 

[ethelzguy]

The only reason the communion rail was taken out was to accomadate communion in the hand while standing.

That’s pure poppycock. Many churches switched to COTH in a double line up the center aisle, and left the rails in for years. They were NOT taken out to “accomodate” COTH, it wasn’t necessary.

 

[Our_Refuge]

That’s pure poppycock. Many churches switched to COTH in a double line up the center aisle, and left the rails in for years. They were NOT taken out to “accomodate” COTH, it wasn’t necessary.

Oh really? Pure “poppycock”? Then why does the consilium that wrote the new mass say in their book *Reform of the Liturgy *by Father Annibale Bugnini, page 645-646
Considering communion in the hand
" It is necessary to anticipate what the effects of such a change of discipline will be:
A. On priests
B. on the faithful
C.On the way in which the berad is made, it will have to be made denser in order to prevent its slipping from the hand as easily and also to prevent, as far aspossible, the breaking off of fragments.
D.on **material changes **in the churches, the possible removal of communion rails.

This was the first time anyone had considered the removal of communion rails and it is in the context of communion in the hand. To this day the rails remain optional.

 

[Sarpedon]

I don’t like to think about such things. I simply attend mass, pray and study.

But you do, and take a side. Whether you think about it or not, you argue that certain changes are inorganic and thus insinuate that the church erred.

 

[Freshman88]

But you do, and take a side. Whether you think about it or not, you argue that certain changes are inorganic and thus insinuate that the church erred.

The Church is incapable of error. Any error that occurs is because of members, not because of the Church. I’m sure your aware of this, but I mention it only to help you understand how I can coop with such a situation.

 

[Sarpedon]

The Church is incapable of error. Any error that occurs is because of members, not because of the Church. I’m sure your aware of this, but I mention it only to help you understand how I can coop with such a situation.

So you believe that God allowed the leadership of the Church to lead the entire western church into using a degraded liturgy to the detriment of their salvation? This makes God’s promise that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” sound kind of shaky.

 

[SJP]

So you believe that God allowed the leadership of the Church to lead the entire western church into using a degraded liturgy to the detriment of their salvation? This makes God’s promise that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” sound kind of shaky.

When speaking on questions of faith or morals, the Church can never teach error. That does not mean that every decision made by every Pope and Bishop is a good one. Would you agree?

With respect to your earlier question, the EF of the Mass has certainly experienced organic development.

 

[ethelzguy]

Oh really? Pure “poppycock”? Then why does the consilium that wrote the new mass say in their book *Reform of the Liturgy *by Father Annibale Bugnini, page 645-646
Considering communion in the hand
" It is necessary to anticipate what the effects of such a change of discipline will be:
A. On priests
B. on the faithful
C.On the way in which the berad is made, it will have to be made denser in order to prevent its slipping from the hand as easily and also to prevent, as far aspossible, the breaking off of fragments.
D.on **material changes **in the churches, the possible removal of communion rails.

This was the first time anyone had considered the removal of communion rails and it is in the context of communion in the hand. To this day the rails remain optional.

But now you’re changing your tune…your earlier post stated clearly that they were removed to accomodate COTH.

 

[Our_Refuge]

**But now you’re changing your tune…**your earlier post stated clearly that they were removed to accomodate COTH.

How have I changed my tune?? I am simply quoting from the Consilium’s notes on what would be necessary if communion in the hand were to be allowed.

From the Consilium
Considering communion in the hand
" It is necessary to anticipate what the **effects of such a change **of discipline will be:
A. On priests
B. on the faithful
C.On the way in which the bread is made, it will have to be made denser in order to prevent its slipping from the hand as easily and also to prevent, as far as possible, the breaking off of fragments.
D.on material changes in the churches, the possible removal of communion rails.

 

[ethelzguy]

How have I changed my tune?? I am simply quoting from the Consilium’s notes on what would be necessary if communion in the hand were to be allowed.

From the Consilium
Considering communion in the hand
" It is necessary to anticipate what the **effects of such a change **of discipline will be:
A. On priests
B. on the faithful
C.On the way in which the bread is made, it will have to be made denser in order to prevent its slipping from the hand as easily and also to prevent, as far as possible, the breaking off of fragments.
D.on material changes in the churches, the possible removal of communion rails.

“Possible removal” does not equate to “taken out to accomodate”. It was not physically necessary to take them out to accomodate COTH. as you stated, then tried to back up with the “possible removal” quote.

 

[Sarpedon]

When speaking on questions of faith or morals, the Church can never teach error. That does not mean that every decision made by every Pope and Bishop is a good one. Would you agree?

Yes, and would you agree that the liturgy falls under the “faith” category?

With respect to your earlier question, the EF of the Mass has certainly experienced organic development.

So what’s the big deal with allowing more?

 

[Our_Refuge]

“Possible removal” does not equate to “taken out to accomodate”. It was not physically necessary to take them out to accomodate COTH. as you stated, then tried to back up with the “possible removal” quote.

There are none so blind as those that will not see

 

[ethelzguy]

There are none so blind as those that will not see

I see, just fine, thanks. I also know manipulation and wordsmithing when I see it.

I suspect if you review some of the other threads around here, you will find that the removal of the rails was NOT about CITH, it was about bringing the congregation and the clergy closer at the Mass.

Rail removal may have occured as an indirect result of CITH but was not done to accomodate same.

 

[Saint_Gemma]

So, if someone ADDED a Communion rail centuries ago, it’s organic, but if someone takes it out centuries later, it’s inorganic and wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Communion rails or something similar to them have existed ever since the Church came out of the catacombs and established regular churches. The only reason that Jesus did not have one at the Last Supper was that everyone there was a bishop.