Seagull did it!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seagull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The altar railing on became to be used for communion way AFTER they were brought into the churches.
They were designed solely to keep the laity form the altar area.
 
Yes we do.
It was the Passover Meal at the Last Supper.
There is NOT ONE PLACE in the Jewish faith or Hebrew culture where the Father (Head of household) places ritual food in another person’s mouth.

Ignoring history is never good.
Communion on the tongue came centuries later.
I receive on the tongue. That is my preference, but it not holier or better.
It is permitted to receive in the hand, and those who do, certainly do devoutly.
 
Last edited:
Where is your source for the design of the communion rail? You brought it up.
 
Last edited:
pianistclare said:
It is permitted to receive in the hand, and those who do, certainly do devoutly.
Click to expand...
Not all do devoutly enough, some are even careless. I’ve been to a Novis Ordo Mass for my uncle’s wedding and have seen it. There’s alot less chance of disrespect if receiving on the tongue was the only way allowed.
 
One of my theology textbooks in grad school. You look it up since you seem to deny it.
There was a time when the faithful were not permitted to even enter the church and received through a rail at the front door, remember?
 
AHA, Novus Ordo Mass rears it’s ugly head.
I’m out.
You have made up your mind that we are all wrong.
Goodbye.
 
pianistclare said:
One of my theology textbooks in grad school. You look it up since you seem to deny it.
There was a time when the faithful were not permitted to even enter the church and received through a rail at the front door, remember?
Click to expand...
To add to this they were no pews, either. Until protestants came along and tried to make the space more friendly to people. Churches were supposed to be the entrance to the divine. So of course even in the churches there was a huge separation between people and Mass.
 
Well since you wnat to tell me I’m wrong, here you go:

Nineteenth-century wooden and iron altar rails from St Pancras Church, Ipswich
The altar rail (also known as a communion rail or chancel rail) is a low barrier, sometimes ornate and usually made of stone, wood or metal in some combination, delimiting the chancel or the sanctuary and altar in a church,[1][2] from the nave and other parts that contain the congregation. Often a gate, or just a gap, at the centre divides the line into two parts. Rails are a very common, but not inevitable, feature of Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, and Methodist churches. They are usually about two feet 6 inches high, with a padded step at the bottom, and designed so that the wider top of the rail can support the forearms or elbows of a kneeling person.

The altar rail is a modest substitute for earlier barriers demarcating the chancel, the area containing the altar, which was reserved (with greatly varying degrees of strictness) for officiating clergy (including boys as choristers and altar servers). Although it only emerged after the Protestant Reformation, it has been found convenient by both Roman Catholic and more traditional Protestant churches (such as the Anglican, Lutheran and Methodist churches), although it is disliked by many Reformed and nondenominational churches.
 
Please show this to everybody! It decides it. I like that it shows how Catholic art has always portrayed receiving by the tongue, and it brings up the fact about what the Catholics during the persecution did.
 
Also, the Apostles on the night of the Last Supper were likely a bit baffled by what was happening. The concept of Eucharist was introduced for the first time. They didn’t understand becoming priests at the time. They were still Jews observing Jewish Passover, so there is no “permissions” taking place.

Many of the “laws” we observe today have transpired and developed through the centuries. The Last Supper was a pivotal point in salvation history. Something they likely didn’t truly realize until after the Crucifixion in the Upper Room. They DID become priests. Peter became Pope. And Mass in the early centuries was far different than what we have now.
The Sanctus was added centuries later, for example.
Take some theology courses at a Catholic university or buy some good History books of interested in the development of the Mass.
 
It doesn’t “decide” it. The Church decides it. And they have decided that communion in the hand is permitted.

“Catholic Art”
You’re not serious.
The most famous Italian Last Supper painting has everyone seated on the same side of a table with the Italian countryside in the background.
Riiiiiiiight.

I’m out for sure now.
 
You are getting off topic. You yourself said that you receive communion on your tongue, so why are you debating this. You must do what you do because you believe it to be right.
 
I normally receive on the tongue, but in several instances lately, due to getting two colds in a short period, I opted for Communion in hand to reduce the chances of passing the virus on.

I will say this—I have been receiving on the tongue mainly for a while. I can think of several incidents where there were accidents that caused the Host to fall and touch the ground—even when a Priest or Deacon (with one Deacon, it actually happened twice—I wish they had the Paten like they used in the old days to prevent accidents ) was who I was receiving from. I always picked the Host up immediately and ate it without question, but it left me uneasy. I can’t remember any time I received in hand a time where I dropped a Consecrated Host. It is much riskier to receive on the tongue, even from clergy, than it is to take in hand in my opinion (when no paten is used).
 
I have to laugh at this. Catholic art shows Mary breast-feeding Jesus with men around with her boobs exposed. Almost no way she would’ve done that in real life.
 
You can’t possibly state this.
I teach the faith.
I am obligated to teach the truth, as history records it.
The good sisters taught me to receive on the tongue,
It’s right for ME, not everyone beside me, as I don’t tend to peer into their souls.
I’m not debating, I’m telling you FACTS which you choose to ignore.

Artists do not decide cultural and liturgical norms for the Church. You should know this.
The Church herself has spoken.
One may not tell people they are wrong for doing something that the Church permits, no matter how one feels about it personally.
 
BridgetN said:
You are getting off topic. You yourself said that you receive communion on your tongue, so why are you debating this. You must do what you do because you believe it to be right.
Click to expand...
It’s actually about comfort level for some people. When my children are small and I have to hold them in my hands I receive on the tounge. When I have my hands free I Receive in my hands. And when I have an asthmatic cough I arrange the situation so that I can receive with my hands and not make the priest feel as if I’m spreading germs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top