Why Have a Communion Rail?

[JKirkLVNV]

jlw:

I can understand that if the altar floors are hardwood, as ours is, but quite a few altars I have seen are carpeted. Wouldn’t that make a reinstallation “less” expensive??

Parishes spend money on all sorts of things. If a parish priest thought altar rails were a necessity or desireable, they’d find a way to pay for it. Our pastor saved for something like 4 years and then completely redid the interior of the church.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

jlw:

Absolutely! And thus, my opinion on kneeling (yes, a rail is necessary) instead of standing, as was discussed on another thread.

And, JLW, re: the other thread, I never said kneeling wasn’t good or even not desireable. I simply said we’d been asked to stand. I must say you were among the nicer of those who took up the cudgel on behalf of kneeling.

 

[jlw]

JKirkLVNV:

And, JLW, re: the other thread, I never said kneeling wasn’t good or even not desireable. I simply said we’d been asked to stand. I must say you were among the nicer of those who took up the cudgel on behalf of kneeling.

Oh, yeah. TNT etc??

I was playing the good cop…

 

[jlw]

jlw:

Oh, yeah. TNT etc??

I was playing the good cop…

You know, religion and politics can be such emotional issues and sometimes in the heat of it, with all the accusations flying and sarcasm and such, sometimes to spirit of the debate gets lost. I thought it better to acknowledge that I might have missed something, ask for a possible correction, and then reword my questions in a more effective and less combative way without compromising my conviction in the process.

I like being flip and sarcastic every once in a while, just to drive home a point, but acknowledging someone’s take on something, whether we agree or not, goes a long way in getting my thoughts heard too.

 

[kmktexas]

JNB:

An altar rail is an extension of the altar itself, and has to be made of the same material as the altar itself, and crafted in the same manner as the altar itself, and this at times does make the cost to be fairly expensive, especially if the parish got rid of its altar rails and didnt store them.

Although the altar rail as an extension of the altar is an interesting concept, I have never seen it done that way. In the “old days” when the rail was mandatory, the altar was always made of marble or another noble stone. The rails were usually wooden and some had padded tops. I have seen some with marble inserts but they were more likely to be made in the same style as the pews than in the style of the altar. The altar itself, in those days was not free-standing and was usually in a “style” that was much more ornate and sacred than the other church furnishings.

Although the nostalgia for the rail usually is for Communion purposes, the real reason to have the rail is to clearly deliniate the boundaries of the sanctuary. A rail in a style that was more “of the nave” than “of the sactuary” would suit this purpose just fine.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

jlw:

You know, religion and politics can be such emotional issues and sometimes in the heat of it, with all the accusations flying and sarcasm and such, sometimes to spirit of the debate gets lost. I thought it better to acknowledge that I might have missed something, ask for a possible correction, and then reword my questions in a more effective and less combative way without compromising my conviction in the process.

I like being flip and sarcastic every once in a while, just to drive home a point, but acknowledging someone’s take on something, whether we agree or not, goes a long way in getting my thoughts heard too.

I very much agree and try to hew to that myself. But then there will be a very rad trad who wants the Church to abrogate VII or who says we’re going to hell for taking Communion in the hand or our Protestant family members who have died are already roasting in hell, and I just loose it. AND they won’t acknowledge that some of them are just as Protestant as the Protestants (looking at it logically).

 

[INRI]

At my old parish, there was a recent renovation to the interior. The communion rail had already been long gone but was still sitting up in the attic. The church itself was 100 years old and still retained the high altar. There was the question of revamping the shape of the steps leading into the sanctuary. He insisted that the steps retain the old shape so that it would fit the altar rail if he or a future pastor would ever want to bring the rail back.

I find it ironic that in many ways, depite its theological confusions, the Anglican Church is often more “liturgical” than the modern Catholic Church. Here’s to hoping that the pendulum keeps swinging back to center.

 

[Kielbasi]

Communion rails were fine, back in their day.

But in our current era, they are a hinderance when one considers the number of EMHC/EM’s and others both entering and leaving the sanctuary area during mass. The reintroduction of communion rails would cause real problems as far as traffic control and decorum, particularly as the people now receive communion in both kinds while standing.

If the places that have them want to keep them, that’s fine as a local tradition, but mandating their return wouldn’t be a very wise idea.

 

[INRI]

Communion rails were fine, back in their day.

But in our current era, they are a hinderance when one considers the number of EMHC/EM’s and others both entering and leaving the sanctuary area during mass. The reintroduction of communion rails would cause real problems as far as traffic control and decorum, particularly as the people now receive communion in both kinds while standing.

If the places that have them want to keep them, that’s fine as a local tradition, but mandating their return wouldn’t be a very wise idea.

Most places that use an altar rail either don’t give communion under both species or use intinction. I don’t think it would cause any problems to decorum and may actually increase it. Altar rails don’t appreciably hinder the distribution of communion. I would find it hard to imagine using EMHC’s with altar rails; maybe that’s a GOOD thing! Nobody is advocating making them mandatory. In some modern churches, they would look as out of place as a stained glass window on an airplane hangar. I am instantly suspicious of any argument that starts with “But in our current era”, or “But in this day and age…”. If it’s a good idea, the date on the calendar doesn’t matter.

 

[jlw]

Communion rails were fine, back in their day.

But in our current era, they are a hinderance when one considers the number of EMHC/EM’s and others both entering and leaving the sanctuary area during mass. The reintroduction of communion rails would cause real problems as far as traffic control and decorum, particularly as the people now receive communion in both kinds while standing.

If the places that have them want to keep them, that’s fine as a local tradition, but mandating their return wouldn’t be a very wise idea.

Which leads me back to the question that led my TO THE CHURCH in the first place: Which is better, tradition or modernity??

The Catholic Church is a sacramental faith. The use of imagery (statues, icons, stained glass, etc, etc) to not only tell the story but also present OUTWARD signs of our reverence to Christ and his Chuch is very important! The communion rail is sacramental in that same way. That traditional “gate” separating the world to the mysterious heavenly host is a VISUAL and TANGIBLE reminder of what our Catholic Faith and THE MASS is about.

SEE post # 8 (i think?) by **prometheum_x. **Good explanation of this.

Are the modern concerns valid?? (uncomfortable for EM’s etc) Sure, in a way, and they can’t be dismissed wholesale, but nor should the faithful ignore the sacredness of church traditions, either bigT or small t.

 

[Kielbasi]

Most places that use an altar rail either don’t give communion under both species or use intinction. I don’t think it would cause any problems to decorum and may actually increase it. Altar rails don’t appreciably hinder the distribution of communion. I would find it hard to imagine using EMHC’s with altar rails; maybe that’s a GOOD thing!

Communion rails could , of course , be reintroduced where they have been removed.

It wouldn’t be wise to do in the interests of decorum and order, unless there was extensive training and rehearsals for all of the EMHC’s. The stand-alone re-introduction would be a real problem in most churches in terms of traffic that would need to be addressed.

 

[kmktexas]

But in our current era, they are a hinderance when one considers the number of EMHC/EM’s and others both entering and leaving the sanctuary area during mass.

Anything that hinders that number of people entering and leaving the sanctuary during Mass is a good thing.

Actually, if the number of parishioners receiving Communion truly justified a “number” EMHCs, then they would probably be distributing at stations around the church. They could easily be given their own Communion and then the chalice or ciborium to take to their station without having to go through the santuary at all. The altar servers are supposed to stay in the sanctuary anyway. The use of the rail would likely end the wrong practice of having the servers sit outside of the sanctuary. The readers are the only other people who would be entering and leaving and the rail is no hinderance at all. In fact, if the readers had to come through the center instead of slip in from the side, as I’ve sometimes seen, you might even see more of them making a gesture of reverence to the altar on their way.

The main reason that I have gathered that many churches removed the rails was that it was part of the anti-clericalism movement, trying to blur the roles of the laity and the priest. That movement is all but dead now, thank goodness.

BTW, I am assuming that by EMs you mean Eucharistic Ministers, which would mean priests. If you have such a large number of priests distributing Communion that they are a traffic problem, you should count your blessings.

 

[jlw]

kmktexas:

Anything that hinders that number of people entering and leaving the sanctuary during Mass is a good thing.

The main reason that I have gathered that many churches removed the rails was that it was part of the anti-clericalism movement, trying to blur the roles of the laity and the priest. That movement is all but dead now, thank goodness.

Yes…and YES.

 

[romano]

[snip]
. . . .
IMNSHO they should not have been removed because their removal helped to contribute to the general loss of the sense of the sacred.

Deacon Ed

Very true. Apparently their removal also made it very difficult for the elderly and those suffering from bad knees to stand up after kneeling since they were left without any support.