Question regarding history communion via line vs Altar Rail in OF

[Cat]

I disagree. When kneeling at the rail I have nothing to think about and occupy my mind other than the sacrament I am about to receive. Thus when a place become available at the rail, I shuffle forward, kneel down, drop all other thoughts from my mind and await my turn. When queing single file I am occupied by the continuous shuffle of the line right up until the very moment that I receive the sacrament. Thus even if both processes take the same time overall, at the rail I have more quality time.

The times I have received at the rail, I am pre-occupied by the fear that I won’t be able to get up (osteoarthritis of the knee), or that I will fall when I stand up, or that I will knock someone else over, or that my dress will get tangled and I will either show my undies, or rip the skirt off as I attempt to stand up.

But when I am in the line waiting to receive, my thoughts are filled with the walk of Christ to Calvary, and the fact that I am offering myself for His service.

You see, what we are pre-occupied with depends on who we are and where we are in our lives. Think about that.

 

[johnnyc176]

Thanks for the two replies thus far… They lead to a follow up question: what was driving Communion in the Hand? Protestant communities? Why that change?

I found this interesting article on Catholic Culture

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8616

 

[LisaB]

It saddens me that the OP mentions how “fast” the Communion process is with an altar rail. I would have had my ears so thoroughly boxed, in my youth, that they would have been ringing the next morning if I had rushed through Sunday dinner with guests. And if a simple Sunday dinner requires a minimum of decorum and respect for both the cook and the guests, how much more decorum should we have when we are receiving Our Lord? Is that really something to be rushed? To be fast about?

I think OP meant that it didn’t take any longer to administer Communion at the rail than it would in Communion line, so we can’t use quicker distribution as a reason for doing away with the rail. OP can correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s how I read it.

I actually think the rail if quicker than the Communion line, especially in smaller churches. With the line, the priest has to wait on each communicant to step aside after receiving and for the next one to come up. With the rail, the communicants wait on the priest, so the priest moves through the line much quicker.

Although if a church only has one priest and a large congregation, I can see how it would take a very long time to administer to everyone at the rail. But I agree with you, timing shouldn’t be the deciding factor by any means - what’s the rush?

 

[LisaB]

The times I have received at the rail, I am pre-occupied by the fear that I won’t be able to get up (osteoarthritis of the knee), or that I will fall when I stand up, or that I will knock someone else over, or that my dress will get tangled and I will either show my undies, or rip the skirt off as I attempt to stand up.

But when I am in the line waiting to receive, my thoughts are filled with the walk of Christ to Calvary, and the fact that I am offering myself for His service.

You see, what we are pre-occupied with depends on who we are and where we are in our lives. Think about that.

If you can’t kneel, you can just stand next to the rail. You are not obligated to kneel if you can’t do so.

 

[otjm]

I found this interesting article on Catholic Culture

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8616

Mother Theresa herself repudiated that she ever made the statement alleged to her in the article, and the priest who broadcast that she had said this later retracted. Aside from the fact that the article is slanted by the author’s personal opinion, it ignores all of the rest of the issue, as well as trotting out the non-statement.

The norm for receiving universally is on the tongue, and by indult, in the hand. No one has a right to criticize another as to their desire in the mode of receiving - and that means both sides.

And the argument put forth that this has cased a loss of reverence is more fueled by the personal opinion opposing CITH than by any research, and ignores the 30 to 40 years of abysmal catechesis and the profound effects from that.

Let’s put it to rest.

 

[paperwight66]

Mother Theresa herself repudiated that she ever made the statement alleged to her in the article, and the priest who broadcast that she had said this later retracted. Aside from the fact that the article is slanted by the author’s personal opinion, it ignores all of the rest of the issue, as well as trotting out the non-statement.

.

Indeed. One only has to go to the ‘Mother Teresa Center’ website to find a whole page of sayings that the Missionaries of Charity say are wrongly attributed to her.

 

[Cat]

If you can’t kneel, you can just stand next to the rail. You are not obligated to kneel if you can’t do so.

Yes, I know. In recent years, I have done that, but a few years ago, I was more able to kneel.

People with arthritis are always thinking about their pain and their mobility issues. We make decisions about our lives (e.g., should I sign up for the Ladies’ Outing at the parish?) based on our abilities and limitations. I hate this, but it’s the way it is.

It’s not just kneeling. Even when I walk forward in the Communion line, I am worried about falling. I’ve stumbled many times (small movements with my feet are difficult). And if anyone stops in front of me, watch out. Again, as I said to the other poster, what you are thinking about as you wait for your turn to receive Holy Communion depends on your individual circumstances, and it has nothing to do with our soul’s state, or our reverence. We do not cease to be human beings during Mass. I’m guessing that most mothers with babies and small children in tow think about their little ones whether they are kneeling at a rail to receive, or standing in a line to receive.

 

[phil19034]

I think OP meant that it didn’t take any longer to administer Communion at the rail than it would in Communion line, so we can’t use quicker distribution as a reason for doing away with the rail. OP can correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s how I read it.

I actually think the rail if quicker than the Communion line, especially in smaller churches. With the line, the priest has to wait on each communicant to step aside after receiving and for the next one to come up. With the rail, the communicants wait on the priest, so the priest moves through the line much quicker.

Although if a church only has one priest and a large congregation, I can see how it would take a very long time to administer to everyone at the rail. But I agree with you, timing shouldn’t be the deciding factor by any means - what’s the rush?

Yes, thank you LisaB; that is what I meant. Kneeling did not take longer than the line, especially with more than one distributing communion.

And honestly, when kneeling you have more time to pray while waiting for the priest.

BTW - thank you for some of the history provided by many of you. Very enlightening.

God Bless

 

[Chatter163]

The indult to receive communion in the hand was given at different times in different countries. It was not permitted in the US until 1977, though it was widely practiced disobediently before that time (much like altar girls, which were not officially permitted until 1994).

 

[babochka]

It saddens me that the OP mentions how “fast” the Communion process is with an altar rail. I would have had my ears so thoroughly boxed, in my youth, that they would have been ringing the next morning if I had rushed through Sunday dinner with guests. And if a simple Sunday dinner requires a minimum of decorum and respect for both the cook and the guests, how much more decorum should we have when we are receiving Our Lord? Is that really something to be rushed? To be fast about?

I believe the comment about the speed might have been brought because, in many places, the excessive use of EMHC is justified because distribution of communion without them would take an undue amount of time. The comment that the Communion process was fast with the use of an altar rail and just two people distributing Communion, could have been a reference to this.

 

[babochka]

Yes, I know. In recent years, I have done that, but a few years ago, I was more able to kneel.

People with arthritis are always thinking about their pain and their mobility issues. We make decisions about our lives (e.g., should I sign up for the Ladies’ Outing at the parish?) based on our abilities and limitations. I hate this, but it’s the way it is.

It’s not just kneeling. Even when I walk forward in the Communion line, I am worried about falling. I’ve stumbled many times (small movements with my feet are difficult). And if anyone stops in front of me, watch out. Again, as I said to the other poster, what you are thinking about as you wait for your turn to receive Holy Communion depends on your individual circumstances, and it has nothing to do with our soul’s state, or our reverence. We do not cease to be human beings during Mass. I’m guessing that most mothers with babies and small children in tow think about their little ones whether they are kneeling at a rail to receive, or standing in a line to receive.

I can relate to this in a small way. I twisted my knee a couple of weeks ago and have been unable to walk normally (with stability and without a limp) since that time. Communion in the Byzantine Church is received standing; the priest drops the Eucharist into one’s mouth from a small spoon. Although in our parish the priest is slightly elevated, it is common to squat just a bit, in order to make it easier for the priest to reach the mouth. I have trouble standing with stability and crouching down is out of the question, so I spent my time in the communion thinking about each next step, and while I was receiving Communion, I was focused on not falling. It was a change from normal. Usually, I’m focused on the kids - is this daughter’s hair out of her face (gets in the way of communion if it is over the mouth)? Is this son standing too far from the chalice? Is this son standing too close to the person in front of him? Some of us do not, at this stage in life, have the luxury of only focusing only on ourselves and our personal readiness to receive. I suspect God understands, as he has sent us these little distractions. and the responsibilities that go along with them.

 

[Cat]

I can relate to this in a small way. I twisted my knee a couple of weeks ago and have been unable to walk normally (with stability and without a limp) since that time. Communion in the Byzantine Church is received standing; the priest drops the Eucharist into one’s mouth from a small spoon. Although in our parish the priest is slightly elevated, it is common to squat just a bit, in order to make it easier for the priest to reach the mouth. I have trouble standing with stability and crouching down is out of the question, so I spent my time in the communion thinking about each next step, and while I was receiving Communion, I was focused on not falling. It was a change from normal. Usually, I’m focused on the kids - is this daughter’s hair out of her face (gets in the way of communion if it is over the mouth)? Is this son standing too far from the chalice? Is this son standing too close to the person in front of him? Some of us do not, at this stage in life, have the luxury of only focusing only on ourselves and our personal readiness to receive. I suspect God understands, as he has sent us these little distractions. and the responsibilities that go along with them.

Amen.

Jesus is human, and He understands our weaknesses.

 

[otjm]

The indult to receive communion in the hand was given at different times in different countries. It was not permitted in the US until 1977, though it was widely practiced disobediently before that time (much like altar girls, which were not officially permitted until 1994).

I don’t know how to find a specific thread and post, so I copied off Br. JR, FFV’s answer to this.

"Let’s dispel some myths here.

First, Communion in the hand began as an act of disobedience.

This is not true. This is a myth that was created by Traditionalists in order to find a justification to condemn CITH. The truth is more simple and less exciting. In Europe, certain bishops authorized communion in the hand in their dioceses. Therefore, the priests who took advantage of the permission were not being disobedient.

The bishops who did so did not ask Rome for permission. This part is true. However, canonically, this does not constitute disobedience on the part of the bishops involved, because Canon Law is very clear the the (sic) diocesan bishop is the highest authority in his diocese. The question that was raised was whether or not the law covered this particular action on the part of the bishops.

At the end of the day, the canonists could not agree. Some said that the law said that the bishop is the highest liturgical authority only covers what is in the books. Other canonists said that the law is not specific enough, and therefore, it could not be limited to just what was in the books.

To settle the issue, the Holy See issued an indult that is available to any conference of bishops that asks for it or to any individual bishop who asks for it. However, it is understood that the diocesan bishop always has the last word on the matter."

And that is what Br. JR had to say on the matter.

I have yet to see that disputed, other than “well, he’s just wrong” with no citation.

 

[Vico]

I don’t know how to find a specific thread and post, so I copied off Br. JR, FFV’s answer to this.

"Let’s dispel some myths here.

First, Communion in the hand began as an act of disobedience.

This is not true. This is a myth that was created by Traditionalists in order to find a justification to condemn CITH. The truth is more simple and less exciting. In Europe, certain bishops authorized communion in the hand in their dioceses. Therefore, the priests who took advantage of the permission were not being disobedient.

The bishops who did so did not ask Rome for permission. This part is true. However, canonically, this does not constitute disobedience on the part of the bishops involved, because Canon Law is very clear the the (sic) diocesan bishop is the highest authority in his diocese. The question that was raised was whether or not the law covered this particular action on the part of the bishops.

At the end of the day, the canonists could not agree. Some said that the law said that the bishop is the highest liturgical authority only covers what is in the books. Other canonists said that the law is not specific enough, and therefore, it could not be limited to just what was in the books.

To settle the issue, the Holy See issued an indult that is available to any conference of bishops that asks for it or to any individual bishop who asks for it. However, it is understood that the diocesan bishop always has the last word on the matter."

And that is what Br. JR had to say on the matter.

I have yet to see that disputed, other than “well, he’s just wrong” with no citation.

What we know for certain is what is contained in the 1969 instruction from The Congregation for Divine Worship on May 29, 1969 called Memoriale Domini… the Supreme Pontiff judged that the long received manner of ministering Holy Communion to the faithful should not be changed. The Apostolic See therefore strongly urges bishops, priests, and people to observe zealously this law, valid and again confirmed, according to the judgment of the majority of the Catholic episcopate, in the form which the present rite of the sacred liturgy employs, and out of concern for the common good of the Church.

   If the contrary usage, namely, of placing Holy Communion in the hand, has already developed in any place, in order to help the episcopal conference fulfill their pastoral office in today's often difficult situation, the Apostolic See entrusts to the conferences the duty and function of judging particular circumstances, if any. They may make this judgment provided that any danger is avoided of insufficient reverence or false opinions of the Holy Eucharist arising in the minds of the faithful and that any other improprieties be carefully removed.