Why communion rails matter

  • Thread starter Thread starter datritle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cat said:
Frankly, I find it irreverent that laypeople on an online forum, who have no personal knowledge of a parish or diocese and the priests, feel that they can pass judgement and cast doubts upon the actions of priests who choose to make use of EMsHC instead of appearing at every Mass to help with distributing Holy Communion.
Click to expand...
I am reverent towards the Lord Jesus.
Who are we laypeople to question the ordained servants of the Lord Jesus? Who are we to assume that because we have read through the various Church documents, that we have more knowledge about the Mass and being a pastor than those men who have spent years studying these things at a seminary?
Click to expand...
I find this mindset very disturbing. I usually enjoy your posts, and normally agree with you, but on this I disagree. I believe that if the people are not allowed to urge the clergy to follow their own rules, we create a dangerous divide between the clergy and the laity. A divide where the clergy don’t have to follow their own published rules because “they know better” or 'there are other circumstances" , but we, the laity, are told that if we do that we are being “relativists”.

I can not tell a priest, “This is not a sin for me. You don’t understand the complexity of my life and the tradeoffs that I have to make”, so they should not tell me, “The GIRM is just a guideline, I do not follow it because I know better.” That creates confusion among the laity.
 
PaulinVA said:
I am reverent towards the Lord Jesus.

I find this mindset very disturbing. I usually enjoy your posts, and normally agree with you, but on this I disagree. I believe that if the people are not allowed to urge the clergy to follow their own rules, we create a dangerous divide between the clergy and the laity. A divide where the clergy don’t have to follow their own published rules because “they know better” or 'there are other circumstances" , but we, the laity, are told that if we do that we are being “relativists”.

I can not tell a priest, “This is not a sin for me. You don’t understand the complexity of my life and the tradeoffs that I have to make”, so they should not tell me, “The GIRM is just a guideline, I do not follow it because I know better.” That creates confusion among the laity.
Click to expand...
And I agree with you on this.

But I don’t think most priests are saying, “The GIRM is just a guideline, I don’t follow it because I know better.”

I think that there is a lot more to Canon Law and the rubrics than what the average layman can keep up with, and that most of us are not in full possession of all the knowledge that a priest and bishop have acquired through literal years of study.

There are a lot of church documents, and even though many laypeople have read through the documents, most of us have not enjoyed the advantage of sitting in classes and having these documents explained to us by great teachers and priests who know all of background, theology, and interpretations of these documents, and then being tested on written and oral examinations about what we have learned.

Our bishop emeritus is in his 70s and has spent his entire life specializing in Canon Law. I would not even begin to suggest that I know something he doesn’t know, or that I have an understanding of church rubrics that he doesn’t have!

I think there is a “pastoral” angle to this that we, as non-pastors, can’t appreciate. I think that the priests and bishops have a better understanding than we do of how to properly, without disobedience to the Church, balance “rubrics” and “taking care of their sheep.”

I also think that the Holy Spirit has given each of us spiritual gifts, and we each need to use our own gifts and not try to use gifts that we don’t have, or tell others with different gifts than us how to use those gifts. I don’t have the "gift of pastoring/shepherding (see Ephesians 4:11, and in fact, the entire chapter). So why should I try to tell someone with the gift of pastoring/shepherding how to pastor/shepherd?

I think that priests and bishops don’t speak up about issues like this and tell us their reasons behind their actions because they know that we are speaking out of ignorance, and out of their love for us, they choose to allow us to chitter chatter like little children rather than telling us straight out that we don’t know what we’re talking about. They have so much to do, so many important issues of faith and morals to deal with on a daily basis, and so many human tragedies to face in their flock–it’s no wonder they choose to leave the little squabbles alone.
 
Cat said:
There are a lot of church documents, and even though many laypeople have read through the documents, most of us have not enjoyed the advantage of sitting in classes and having these documents explained to us by great teachers and priests who know all of background, theology, and interpretations of these documents, and then being tested on written and oral examinations about what we have learned.
Click to expand...
Most of the documents that we are talking about are rather straightforward. The more “you don’t understand because it’s complicated” that I encounter the more I feel that they are not following the plain reading of the document.
I also think that the Holy Spirit has given each of us spiritual gifts, and we each need to use our own gifts and not try to use gifts that we don’t have, or tell others with different gifts than us how to use those gifts. I don’t have the "gift of pastoring/shepherding (see Ephesians 4:11, and in fact, the entire chapter). So why should I try to tell someone with the gift of pastoring/shepherding how to pastor/shepherd?
Click to expand...
I hope I can say this without offending you or being disrespectful to pastors, but reaching a certain age and having a certain number of assignments under one’s belt is different from having the gift of pastor/shepard.
I think that priests and bishops don’t speak up about issues like this and tell us their reasons behind their actions because they know that we are speaking out of ignorance, and out of their love for us, they choose to allow us to chitter chatter like little children rather than telling us straight out that we don’t know what we’re talking about. They have so much to do, so many important issues of faith and morals to deal with on a daily basis, and so many human tragedies to face in their flock–it’s no wonder they choose to leave the little squabbles alone.
Click to expand...
I wish that I had your attitude towards the ordained, but I do not. But, I will say that if they have created a system with so much ambiguity on the basics of worship that people of normal intelligence simply can’t be trusted to understand it, then something is wrong.
 
Cat said:
I think there is a “pastoral” angle to this that we, as non-pastors, can’t appreciate. I think that the priests and bishops have a better understanding than we do of how to properly, without disobedience to the Church, balance “rubrics” and “taking care of their sheep.” .
Click to expand...
I am a little concerned about this statement. It carries with it the implication that the rubrics could have a need to be balanced against 'talking care of their sheep"

The rubrics, being a product of the Church, are specifically created to take care of the sheep.

A departure from the rubrics would be, by definition, a reduction in care of the sheep.
 
So I paraphrase a statement made by Cardinal Arinze, where he explains the reason for kneeling, and that means I, personally, am demandiing that people crawl to receive the Eucharist? :rotfl:

As Young Trad pointed out a number of posts ago, those who cannot kneel because of age or infirmity are not expected to…

As far as too much human dignity to kneel…🤷 Not I. I’m an abject sinner.

EMHC’s…“Vatican II gone off the rail.” 'Nuff said.
 
Faithdancer said:
So I paraphrase a statement made by Cardinal Arinze, where he explains the reason for kneeling, and that means I, personally, am demandiing that people crawl to receive the Eucharist? :rotfl:
Click to expand...
Simply asking you if you crawl.

(It does help if you quote the comment you are responding to.)
 
maryjk said:
Simply asking you if you crawl.

(It does help if you quote the comment you are responding to.)
Click to expand...
Faithdancer said:
Cardinal Arinze is not saying that anyone literally needs to crawl. He is speaking rhetorically.
Click to expand...
maryjk, you are nit-picking when you know perfectly well that it is a rhetorical statement. Please don’t obfuscate the actual discussion with petty attacks.
 
dshix said:
maryjk, you are nit-picking when you know perfectly well that it is a rhetorical statement. Please don’t obfuscate the actual discussion with petty attacks.
Click to expand...
Actually, I had no idea that Faithdancer didn’t expect people to crawl. It wasn’t a petty attack, it was an honest question. 🤷

Again, I say the problem isn’t receiving standing or in the hand. It isn’t that the altar rails aren’t there.

Putting altar rails in, isn’t going to change everyone’s heart.

Again, the problem you are having is assuming that everyone that currently receives standing/in the hand will suddenly and collectively change their attitude simply because they receive while kneeling. (and/or on the tongue.) I just don’t see that happening.
 
maryjk said:
Again, the problem you are having is assuming that everyone that currently receives standing/in the hand will suddenly and collectively change their attitude simply because they receive while kneeling. (and/or on the tongue.) I just don’t see that happening.
Click to expand...
When, may I ask, did I say that?
 
dshix said:
Very well then. I, personally, think it would be useful for parishes to adopt the altar rail again, as long as it is within reason.
Click to expand...
Yes and there is no reason why those who still prefer to receive in the hand cannot do so after the altar rails are installed, or re-installed. In fact the EMHC’s can be administering CITH at the same time the priest is administering the Eucharist to those kneeling at the rail. It sounds wonderfully efficient!🙂
 
Windmill said:
What Church document states that we have infinite dignity as men? Being created “in the image of God” is not the same thing as being created “in the nature of God.” As far as penance, Our Lord himself said that we would do penance after he ascended into Heaven, because we still sin. We need penance to help conform us more closely to Christ precisely because we are not yet completed in our transformation into Christlike persons. We are not God. Therefore, we do penance. We are not infinitely dignified - only God is. We are reflections of that perfection, and we draw our limited dignity from his infinite dignity, but it is pride to say that we do not bow before the all-holy God because we are so dignified.

WRT the OP’s topic, if God can utterly humble Himself to assume the form of Bread and Wine for me to consume, then this poor sinner can kneel to receive Him. It’s the absolute *least *thing I could do to return the gesture.
Click to expand...
The Bible is the document which says that I have infinite value in God’s eyes.

-Tim-
 
maryjk said:
Actually, I had no idea that Faithdancer didn’t expect people to crawl. It wasn’t a petty attack, it was an honest question. 🤷

Again, I say the problem isn’t receiving standing or in the hand. It isn’t that the altar rails aren’t there.

**Putting altar rails in, isn’t going to change everyone’s heart. **

Again, the problem you are having is assuming that everyone that currently receives standing/in the hand will suddenly and collectively change their attitude simply because they receive while kneeling. (and/or on the tongue.) I just don’t see that happening.
Click to expand...
Bingo!

Kneeling to recieve is piety, not holiness. Holiness is what gets people to heaven.

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
Bingo!

Kneeling to recieve is piety, not holiness. Holiness is what gets people to heaven.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
But even piety without understanding can lead to holiness. As children, we were taught to place our hand over our heart and remove our hats when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Later, as we grew, we came to understand WHY we did that, and it changed from a thoughtless gesture we only did because we were told to, to one done out of respect and honor. Similarly, with kneeling at the rail, it might begin as simply a thoughtless gesture, but it leads one to ask WHY they’re kneeling.

I’m not saying this is a 100% cure-all (after all, even Heinrich Himmler received at the rail as a child), but it would help remind people of exactly Who we’re receiving.
 
TimothyH said:
The Bible is the document which says that I have infinite value in God’s eyes.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
*Infinite *value? Not to belabor the point, but what part of the Bible tells us that?

I know we can infer that Christ dying on the Cross to atone for the sins of Man is an act of infinite love, but that is because of the infinity of God himself, not because of our value. His heart is overflowing with love, but we are not infinitely valuable. He is the only infinite in the equation of love here. We totally don’t deserve the redemption he offers us. That is why it is gratuitous. It is totally undeserved. If we were of infinite value and dignity, one could infer that we do deserve Christ’s redemptive act.

The end goal in my exchange with you is to affirm the dogma of Original Sin and our humility before an all-loving, almighty God who, through no merit of our own, came down to Earth and died for us. That act of utter humility (the Incarnation) demands a respect. At the altar rail, your external posture informs and guides your intellect to adopt a humble stance before Our Lord in the simply Host before us. It doesn’t guarantee it, but it should lead your mind to humble thoughts.
**Putting altar rails in, isn’t going to change everyone’s heart. **
Click to expand...
As for altar rails - I agree that reinstating altar rails is not going to cause people’s hearts to change. However, Thomas Cranmer (apostate archbishop of Canterbury during the Protestant Revolt in England) knew that **removing **altar rails and allowing Communion in the Hand to standing parishioners would quickly change their hearts against the Real Presence (which is exactly what he wanted, what he did, and what happened).

Would it not seem, in this day and age where belief in the Real Presence wains, that a wise course of action would be to reinstate those external symbols and postures that affirm such a central tenet of our faith? What harm could come from it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top