Why would someone complain about this (re: Communion)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rand_Al_Thor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rand_Al_Thor

Guest
Pax vobiscum!

My uncle is a priest and is the pastor of a parish. He felt that with people coming up in the Communion line like most parishes have now, there was too much movement and not enough time for people to think and pray about the Eucharist. Now, the church he is at long ago tore out its Communion rail, so he had people line up standing along the front and distributed Communion that way. Well, someone (or more than one person) complained about it. But did they talk to him? Nope. They just called up the archbishop, who told my uncle not to do that anymore.

Now why in the world would people have a problem with this? The point of it was to give people more time to reflect on receiving the Eucharist so that everyone wasn’t just moving the whole time. There was no reason given for the complaint.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Why doesn’t your uncle ask his parishioners, or the parish council, why no one came directly to him?

As for your uncle’s decision regarding how people would line up for Communion, I personally think that such an arrangement would be completely awkward and would not help me “focus” on the Eucharist.
 
1ke said:
Why doesn’t your uncle ask his parishioners, or the parish council, why no one came directly to him?

As for your uncle’s decision regarding how people would line up for Communion, I personally think that such an arrangement would be completely awkward and would not help me “focus” on the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
Pax tecum!

Have you never received at a Communion rail? This was the same arrangement, except people were standing rather than kneeling.

In Christ,
Rand
 
They should have spoken with him first. Perhaps the procession line was awkward and not flowing properly. Without knowing what the set up at the church is , how many people there were it is difficult to assess. He should have been given a reason. The people should have been instructed to explain what the problem was.
 
1ke said:
The standing arrangement is awkward. It is not “like” kneeling at all.
Click to expand...
Pax tecum!

I didn’t say that standing was “like” kneeling, so I don’t know why you put that in quotations. I don’t understand what is awkward about it at all. Can you explain why it would be awkward?

In Christ,
Rand
 
Rand_Al_Thor said:
Pax tecum!

Have you never received at a Communion rail? This was the same arrangement, except people were standing rather than kneeling.

In Christ,
Rand
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that’s a good arrangement when there is no communion rail- unless they knelt on the floor. It may work fine- it just looks too strange when I try to imagine it. Priests can take their time about giving out communion to slow the line down too. It also never hurts to give a homily about reverence in church. He should also tell his parishioners that if they have a problem with something he says or does, they should talk to him about it first.
 
Rand_Al_Thor said:
Pax tecum!

I didn’t say that standing was “like” kneeling, so I don’t know why you put that in quotations. I don’t understand what is awkward about it at all. Can you explain why it would be awkward?

In Christ,
Rand
Click to expand...
So, you walk up in line and then go stand at the bottom step, with a line of people across the front. Then what? You shift from foot to foot (especially if you have a disabling condition or are old). Meanwhile the line of people who started down the aisle and now don’t fit are just standing there too.

Meanwhile the priest is shuffling back and forth across the line.

I’m standing there with my hands in a prayer position, or by my side, or *what *exactly? I’m staring at a fern… or the organist… or maybe the altar if I happen to get in the middle. Or, do I close my eyes (and lose my balance)? Standing is NOT a prayerful position.

Then, I turn around after receiving and “whack” run into the person coming up behind me to take my place.

It is just awkward.

WHAT is the pastor’s reason for putting this in place? It makes more sense for me to receive, go back to my pew, and pray. Not stand there waiting to receive.

It’s my opinion. I’d do it if the pastor asked, I would just think it not the *best *way.

Obviously, the bishop saw merit in the complaints as he told the pastor to stop this procedure.

The fact that I don’t see it as the best way to distribute communion in no way implies I agree with the parishioners who went straight to the bishop. They should have discussed it with the pastor.
 
Some suggestions on why people would not like standing across the front of the sanctuary, waiting to receive Communion:
  • Its an unusual practice, not what people are used to, likely to cause confusion.
  • Communion is likely to take longer
  • There would not be the same flow of people
  • From the 2002 GIRM “160. The priest then takes the paten or ciborium and goes to the communicants, who, as a rule, approach in a procession. …”. Instead of approaching the priest, he his approaching them, perhaps a little like being served by a waiter. So people may think it is less reverent.
Why would people complain to the bishop rather than the priest? The parish priest is a powerful person. He makes lots of decisions such as how money is spent and who does particular ministries. So if people have complaints about how he is doing something they can prefer to remain anonymous by going directly to the bishop. The 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum seems to encourage this, or at least highlight it as an option:
“[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.”
 
Pax tecum!
1ke said:
So, you walk up in line and then go stand at the bottom step, with a line of people across the front. Then what? You shift from foot to foot (especially if you have a disabling condition or are old). Meanwhile the line of people who started down the aisle and now don’t fit are just standing there too.
Click to expand...
We stand for much of the Mass. We walk and stand on our way up to receive. I don’t see the difference here. People that “don’t fit” “just stand there” when a Communion rail is used. I can’t see the difference.
1ke said:
Meanwhile the priest is shuffling back and forth across the line.
Click to expand...
As he does when a Communion rail is used. I don’t see the difference.
1ke said:
I’m standing there with my hands in a prayer position, or by my side, or *what *exactly? I’m staring at a fern… or the organist… or maybe the altar if I happen to get in the middle. Or, do I close my eyes (and lose my balance)? Standing is NOT a prayerful position.
Click to expand...
We stand for much of the Mass. We stand when we pray the Our Father. I guess that should be changed since obviously it’s not a prayerful position to be in. I don’t see how people would lose their balance and if they are distracted, then they would be distracted anyway. I manage to be able to look at the altar or crucifix even when I’m not on that end of the Communion rail.
1ke said:
Then, I turn around after receiving and “whack” run into the person coming up behind me to take my place.
Click to expand...
Again, when a Communion rail is used and people are in the same places (I go to a church that uses a Communion rail), this is never a problem. Also, at my uncle’s church they had it worked out fine so it was all going smoothly…no “whacks”.

In Christ,
Rand
 
John_Lilburne said:
  • Its an unusual practice, not what people are used to, likely to cause confusion.
  • Communion is likely to take longer
  • There would not be the same flow of people
  • From the 2002 GIRM “160. The priest then takes the paten or ciborium and goes to the communicants, who, as a rule, approach in a procession. …”. Instead of approaching the priest, he his approaching them, perhaps a little like being served by a waiter. So people may think it is less reverent.
Click to expand...
  • Which is why it was explained beforehand. Everyone got it down just fine and it went smoothly at Mass.
  • Why is this a concern? Why would you worry that Communion would take too long? Why is a concern to get people out of church in the shortest amount of time possible?
  • That quote refers to how people approach the front of the church, not how they receive, and the people WERE approaching “in a procession”. And when a Communion rail is used, the priest goes along to each person the same way, so I don’t see how this is any different. Is that less reverent, too? Why would you use the analogy of being “served by a waiter” to refer to the priest distributing Communion?
John_Lilburne said:
Why would people complain to the bishop rather than the priest? The parish priest is a powerful person. He makes lots of decisions such as how money is spent and who does particular ministries. So if people have complaints about how he is doing something they can prefer to remain anonymous by going directly to the bishop. The 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum seems to encourage this, or at least highlight it as an option:
Click to expand...
So you would encourage people to not talk to their pastor about any concerns, and rather report him to the archbishop? The same archbishop, by the way, who allows the archdiocese to be part of an “ecumenical” organization that largely supports homosexual marriage and abortion even though he himself doesn’t. Complaints about that have been ignored, and yet this was acted on right away.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Rand_Al_Thor said:
I don’t see the difference here.
Click to expand...
Rand,

It’s how we feel. Period. It’s not a matter of “right” or “wrong”.

You asked why people might have a problem with it, and we are giving you our speculation. Really, only those who complained can say what they found wrong with it.

You keep going back to Communion at the rail. That’s not relevant.

You seem intent on convincing us that we are wrong for having the opinion that it’s not the way we would prefer to receive Communion.

You are quite intent on defending your uncle’s decision. It’s not personal Rand. We don’t know your uncle and we don’t know his parishioners. We don’t know upon what they based their objection.

Why are you so upset about this???
 
What was the archbishop’s reason to disallow it? I have seen liturgical abuses in Portland. I wonder why he is doing something about this when I don’t even see it as an abuse.
 
It always amuses me that when a priest does something that is not within the rubrics but people like it, they ask what is wrong with changing the rubrics to fit what they like; and when they don’t like it, they protest loud and long.

The first issue, not speaking with the priest, is an insult at best to him. since the priest is a relative of the OP, I will presume that the OP knows that no one spoke with the priest, but simply went to Archbishop Vlazny.

The second issue is that Communion at a Communion rail is accepted in this Archdiocese. However, according to the post, there is no Communion rail in this parish.

The rubrics then say that people will approach in procession and receive. To have them line up and stand, as if they were at a Communion rail but not kneeling, is to change the rubric.

The priest may feel that giving Communion will allow, or require people to spend more time thinking about Communion; but I doubt they will be thinking much more than they would have had they received per the rubrics of procession individually up to the priest to receive; in fact, by changing it to something that is unusual, different, and a bit awkward, he may actually have acted to defeat that with some who were receiving.

It has been my observation that the actual time spent with one recipient is longer when it is done individually standing than when people are at an altar rail, and particualarly when they kneel and receive on the tongue. That has often struck me as too assembly line- like. Even at Holy Rosary, where the majority receive on the tongue, the priest shows the Host and says “the Body of Christ” and has it on its way to the tongue even as they are trying to say “Amen”.

So as far as time spent, it is my observation that looking the communicant in the eye and saying “The Body of Christ”, and then looking down and placing it carefully on the palm, is slower.

And if the Cup is also offered, that too slows down the whole process as people wait for someone ahead of them to receive and move on. It would be my guess that the priest in the OP would not be offering the Cup also; if it is being offered, it is requiring the Cup bearer to be moving around unnecessarily.

Going to the Archbishop seems unnecessarily rude and abrupt, unless those doing so have attempted going directly to the priest and found it pointless; and we have no information to judge that issue. It certainly seems a lack of charity.
 
otjm said:
It has been my observation that the actual time spent with one recipient is longer when it is done individually standing than when people are at an altar rail, and particualarly when they kneel and receive on the tongue. That has often struck me as too assembly line- like. Even at Holy Rosary, where the majority receive on the tongue, the priest shows the Host and says “the Body of Christ” and has it on its way to the tongue even as they are trying to say “Amen”.

So as far as time spent, it is my observation that looking the communicant in the eye and saying “The Body of Christ”, and then looking down and placing it carefully on the palm, is slower.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t aware that I was being short-changed in my quality time with the Extraordinary Minister. 😉 Maybe I’m a little pragmatic, but my only real concern in going to the altar was to receive the Eucharist. I didn’t realize the importance of eye contact or the important psychological support from hearing someone say my name (“Aristide, the Body of Christ”). I feel gypped!

Facitiousness aside, speed and eye contact are a very poor second to reverence. It’s not about me, and it’s not about you. It is about Christ.
 
Cavaille-Coll said:
I wasn’t aware that I was being short-changed in my quality time with the Extraordinary Minister. 😉 Maybe I’m a little pragmatic, but my only real concern in going to the altar was to receive the Eucharist. I didn’t realize the importance of eye contact or the important psychological support from hearing someone say my name (“Aristide, the Body of Christ”). I feel gypped!

Facitiousness aside, speed and eye contact are a very poor second to reverence. It’s not about me, and it’s not about you. It is about Christ.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. It is about Christ. However, as an altar boy pre-Vatican 2, I carried the paten as the priest sped down the line at the altar rail making business out of getting those people Communicated. I thought then that his speed was not becoming (OK, I am trying to be nice; I thought it bordered on the irreverant). I had to move right smartly to not get stepped on, and right smartly after him as he sped back to the other end of the line to start anew. Both of the assistant pastors I served for were more reverant - and slower.

About you and me? What do you think reverance is, that it is not shown by a slowing down of the process of distributing Christ? I disagree with you; I think speed; or the lack of it, is an indicator of reverence. Speed to me indicates a lack of reverence; maybe you have a different experience.

Your concern may only be to go up and receive Christ; I too, want to receive Him, but I don’t appreciate the individual who is supposed to be In Persona Christi distributing Communion as if he was late for a flight to Florida and my presence in the Communion line was inhibiting his getting to the airport.

Oh, and I don’t believe anywhere I spoke about any Extraordinary Minister; I was addressing the Ordinary Minister. I expect EMHCs to be just as reverent as the priest, if not more so.
 
The whole thing sounds like a tempest in a teapot. However, you have described the procedure for communion at daily Mass at my parish.

On Sundays we have the normal communion lines.
On weekdays, with a smaller congregation, everyone receives standing at the altar rail (which does not extend the entire length of the sanctuary.)

In years past, daily communicants had knelt at the altar rail. When the USCCB came out with the norm of standing for communion, we continued the same practice, except that we stand instead of kneel.
 
I guess people just don’t like it because it’s different from how it’s normally done. Personally I wouldn’t prefer this method, but I’ve seen it done, and I don’t find it really confusing.
 
1ke said:
Rand,

It’s how we feel. Period. It’s not a matter of “right” or “wrong”.

You asked why people might have a problem with it, and we are giving you our speculation. Really, only those who complained can say what they found wrong with it.

You keep going back to Communion at the rail. That’s not relevant.

You seem intent on convincing us that we are wrong for having the opinion that it’s not the way we would prefer to receive Communion.

You are quite intent on defending your uncle’s decision. It’s not personal Rand. We don’t know your uncle and we don’t know his parishioners. We don’t know upon what they based their objection.

Why are you so upset about this???
Click to expand...
Pax tecum!

I’m not trying to show you you’re wrong. I was trying to explain that I don’t see the difference in what you’re saying in standing or kneeling at a Communion rail, since all the objections would fit as objections to using Communion rails as well.

And as I said, the rubrics say that the people “approach in procession and receive”, but that talks about them coming up to receive, not about their posture or position while receiving. If standing along the front is “changing the rubrics”, because people are supposedly supposed to receive in a single file line, then using a Communion rail would also be changing the rubrics.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top