 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27th, 2007 05:16 pm |
|
Long ago, as an adolescent, I attended a Catholic Mass with my Catholic friend. When the congregation went up to receive Communion, I am pretty sure they knelt at an altar rail (not sure that is what it is called) in the front of the church. They then opened their mouths and received the host. Is this the way the Catholic Church used to receive the Holy Eucharist? It was sometime in the late sixties that I attended this Mass. If so, why the change?
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
beachmoss
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Simpsonville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 289 |
| First Name: | Beth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic (raised Baptist) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27th, 2007 06:09 pm |
|
Hi, Darlene!
You can chalk this one up to Vatican II! I personally don't understand why the change. I'm sure Rick or David will give us an official answer. My feeling is that it is a sign of our fast paced time (the MTV generation). Personally, I prefer an altar rail, and I think the removal had something to do with the congregation not being set apart from the priest and Jesus.
A priest in a church we used to attend had kneelers put in for those who wanted to receive kneeling. We got to visit there a couple of weeks ago, and it was so wonderful to be back. The communion line moved slowly and reverently. It wasn't, as I say of our current parish, the drive-through at McDonald's.
A new church that was built near us several years ago included an altar rail at their pastor's request. They use it for the Tridentine Mass, but not the Novus Ordo. I don't understand why they don't use it, but at least it's nice to see new churches built this way in hopes that kneeling at the altar rail will come back!
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5353 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27th, 2007 10:17 pm |
|
Darlene wrote: Long ago, as an adolescent, I attended a Catholic Mass with my Catholic friend. When the congregation went up to receive Communion, I am pretty sure they knelt at an altar rail (not sure that is what it is called) in the front of the church. They then opened their mouths and received the host. Is this the way the Catholic Church used to receive the Holy Eucharist? It was sometime in the late sixties that I attended this Mass. If so, why the change?
Yes, that is the way Holy Communion used to be distributed in the Catholic Church. A linen drape covered the altar rail (a/k/a communion rail), and the communicant would kneel reverently with his hands under the linen cloth, lest a particle of host might fall on his hands. The altar boy (no girls then) would accompany the priest with a paten and place it under the chin of the communicant to catch any errant particles. As each person received communion they would stand and move away, to be replaced by the next communicant. The priest would travel from one end of the rail to the other, then go back to the beginning and start over. He got a lot more exercise than he does now.
Vatican II called for research into the early liturgies, and for the mass to return to as close to the liturgies of the early church as possible. Communion in the hand was first authorized in 1969, and the authorization was broadened in 1973 and finally approved in the United States in 1978 according to the instructions of Cyril of Jerusalem in the fourth century: “Make your left hand a throne for your right, because your right is going to receive the King; make a hollow of your palm and receive the body of Christ, saying after it: ‘Amen!’ … Then, after you have partaken of the body of Christ, come forward to the chalice of His blood…”.
Of course, "communion in the hand" is a misnomer. We receive the Eucharist on our tongue. We may choose to have the minister place it on our tongue, or we may choose to place it there ourselves. In the Byzantine Rite Churches, the priest administers communion on the tongue in the form of bread and wine combined, using a golden spoon, while the communicant is standing. Anglican Use churches of the Latin Rite, churches using the mass of the 1962 Roman Missal, and some others still use the communion rail; other Churches and Rites use a variety of methods to distribute the Eucharist.
All are equally valid as long as whichever method in use is authorized for that congregation at that time, but kneeling at a rail is still the "official" method in use for the Latin Rite. Any other method requires an "indult" or special permission from the Vatican.
By the way, we renovated our church in the mid-80's when I was president of the Pastoral Council. Our pastor and a majority of the members favored eliminating our communion rail, but I fought to keep it, and I eventually won. Today, my parish church is the only one in our diocese that still has its original communion rail. It is my personal opinion that a Latin Rite Catholic church should have a communion rail, and the Tabernacle should be located inside the rail.
We do not use our altar rail for communion, but we use it several times during the year for Anointing of the Sick at healing masses, for decorative purposes, for Eucharistic Adoration, during Baptism and Confirmation, on Catechetical Sunday for blessing of the catechists, for exorcisms during RCIA, etc. Even if not used for Holy Communion, it is very convenient to have.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2117 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27th, 2007 10:51 pm |
|
I’m beginning to feel positively ancient as each year I see that fewer and fewer people recall “the way it was” in the Catholic Church back before the changeover, which took place in stages between 1966 and 1968.
1. Yes, all churches did have altar rails. A few still do. Three years ago, when I was visiting relatives in Oregon, I checked out a parish run by the Dominicans which had a certain fame for following Vatican II to the letter. They did had an altar rail and they used it for communion. This was the first time since the changeover that I was able to receive communion kneeling at an altar rail. (There is no regular Latin Mass in my home diocese, and I’m not sure I would attend it if there were, because I have apprehensions about about extremists at either end of the scale.)
The fact that this exceptional parish is run by a religious order is likely the only reason that the use of Latin, kneeling for communion and other “non-standard” (for this country) liturgical usage is allowed, since bishops in the US generally insist on uniformity of practice throughout their sees. The religious are not subject to the diocesan bishop, but to their own order’s superiors, and the order is of pontifical right. (“Pontifical right” means that the order answers directly to the pope, rather than to a diocesan bishop after the manner of most religious orders.) Compare this to what Mother Angelica and the Poor Clares did for many years within the confines of their monastery. It was only when she began to relinquish control of EWTN and moved the monastery away from the studio grounds that the local bishop was able to step in and insist on uniformity with the rest of the diocese for the televised Mass.
2. Yes, all communicants in the older liturgy were required to receive on the tongue. Hosts were made differently, too. They were quite thin and literally could melt in your mouth, so there was no need to chew. (And yes, they really did taste like cardboard!) There have been a couple of threads recently on the forum discussing the advisability of chewing. With the present style of host, it is difficult to avoid chewing because they are much more substantial and don’t soften readily with saliva alone.
3. The current “soup line” method of receiving communion in the US is not the standard method worldwide. This is something the US bishops petitioned for and were allowed to implement by way of an indult. In like manner, there are indults for receiving in the hand and for bowing instead of genuflecting. In other words, all this is by way of exception from the standard method, which continues to be as it was prior to the changeover: kneeling at an altar rail and receiving on the tongue. You can verify this in the General Instruction to the Roman Missal (GIRM), which outlines the way in which the Mass is supposed to be celebrated.
There are other indults for the United States which may seem odd to some readers. The practice of kneeling throughout the canon of the Mass, from beginning to end (from the Sanctus to the Amen) is actually allowed by indult. The rest of the world kneels only at the consecration and stands for the rest of the canon. Also, the traditional Mass requires the priest to face the same way as the people — what is called “ad orientem,” or “toward the east,” rather than facing the people. It is only by way of an option that the priest is allowed to face the people in the newer liturgy.
A new church that was built near us several years ago included an altar rail at their pastor's request. They use it for the Tridentine Mass, but not the Novus Ordo. I don't understand why they don't use it.
Probably the bishop did not give permission for it because it would go counter to uniform practice throughout the diocese. But since an altar rail is required for the traditional liturgy, it is allowed. Construction of the rail, then, was probably allowed in contemplation of a regular indult liturgy being allowed there, and it was never intended to be used in the new liturgy.
David
|
|
|
AggieCatholic
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | San Antonio, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 82 |
| First Name: | Lance | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | United Methodist to Roman Catholic (Anglican Use) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 28th, 2007 03:26 am |
|
The history and traditions of the Church before Vatican II are very important. But, many of the changes brought by Vatican II were for the betterment of the Universal Church, if only by intention. Also, it is important to note that many of the less popular changes to out liturgy are often blamed on Vatican II when in fact they came about at different times and through other means. Vatican II did alot of good, but it's been blamed for everything people see as "wrong" with the Church.
I attend Latin Mass on Sundays and it is what one would call very old school. Only male alter servers and dressed in cassocks, incense, two deacons and they read the liturgy, Gregorian Chant Choir, priest facing the alter, kneeling rail, intinction and on the tongue and, of course, everything but the homily in Latin (though you get a cheat book if you need it). I enjoy it because I feel more involved in the Mass itself.
Mass in Latin using the old missal is a rarity and, as I've discovered recently, this isn't such a bad idea. There is a segment of Catholicism, layiety and clergy, who view the New Order Mass as simply wrong, even invalid. This has led to the creation of elitist cliques in some diocese. These extreme tradition minded individuals have created a divide within the Church and the response from Rome has been equally extreme, but necessary (i.e. the excommunication of the entire Society of St. Pius X). If you've ever visited the forum of the Fish Eaters you'll see plenty of examples of this division, though they do have an abundant amount of easy to find information of the Catholic Church.
The rumor is that His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI will issue a decree, of sorts, that will make the Latin Mass more common. This is good news in that we as a Church will be able to experience the Mass as it was for so many centuries. But, it is important to view the Latin Mass for what it is: a respectful commemoration of our heritage as Catholics, not a replacement of the New Order Mass.
____________________
What part of, "Hoc est enim Corpus meum" don't you understand?
|
|
|
Br_Carlo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tyler, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 150 |
| First Name: | Br_Carlo (Vince Brach) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Presbyterian, Episcopalian, CATHOLIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 28th, 2007 09:58 am |
|
God's peace. The Cajun said: "The altar boy (no girls then) would accompany the priest with a paten and place it under the chin of the communicant to catch any errant particles."
Hence, "poor as a church mouse" means really poor! This fastidiousness about losing particles of the Host doesn't leave enough for even a mouse to live on. Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
|
|
|
Steven Barrett
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | Hadley, Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 980 |
| First Name: | Steven | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, Episcopal communicant, Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 30th, 2007 02:34 am |
|
Yes Brother, and I can still remember, almost a half-century later, hearing my older middle brother (I was the youngest by 5 years) who was an altar boy at my First Communion that he'd make sure I'd never forget it if I "blew it at the rail" and let the Host fall from my much younger (and smaller) mouth. Our mom heard about his "advice" and he got it, which meant I got it later -- but then he got it from our oldest brother!
That was way out in Cheyenne WYO back when the "Big Boy" locomotives were still pullin' and puffin' into town -- before Vatican II and the liberal hijacking of the Church which led to the Communion Rail getting run over by the big liberal trainwreck!
Hey, Darlene, you sounded great Saturday night when you called into the Journey Home and talked to Mrs. Pinto. That was a great show, one of Marcus' best.
PS: Whaddya think of the great news about RCIA? There might not be an altar rail awaiting you, but it shouldn't be too long now!
s.
____________________
For anybody interested in reading commentary from a Catholic's socially conservative/fiscally liberal viewpoint, go to my new blog at http://www.politicsramble.com/ .
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 30th, 2007 06:44 pm |
|
Hey Stephen,
I watched the rerun of Journey Home and what a peculiar experience it is to hear one's voice over the telly. As far as the Communion rail goes, I think I like the idea of kneeling at the rail to receive Communion more that standing in a line. I can see the point of a standing in a line in a huge church, but not one where the most that attend each Mass is about 400. I look back on that experience in my youth of attending a Catholic Mass and can recall thinking how reverent everyone was. Of course, if one wants to talk about reverence, I would say that overall, the Catholic Mass is far more reverent than any Evangelical Protestant service (forthe most part) I have ever attended. But I must say, that the Pilgrim Holiness brethren were indeed an exception to the rule among Protestantism. They were very reverent and worshipful both in their attire and attitude during church services.
The nondenom. church I currently attend recently did away with the congregation going up to the front of the church to receive the Lord's Supper. And why, you may ask? Well, one of the elder's wives, who was elated that this change occurred, and was actually one of the movers and shakers to make it come about told me the reason. She said it bothered her and many others that other members would be watching for those who went up to receive Communion and those who didn't. She didn't like the idea that there was "judgement" upon those who either received what some thought inappropriately, or judgement upon those who didn't receive. You know, calculating all the reasons why one would not receive and making judgements about their spirituality or lack thereof. However, I never sensed any of this when I went up to receive the elements, or refrained from going up. Honestly, I think one of the greater reasons to do away with going up to the front of the church to receive, was to cast off any resemblances of the church's roots, which was of the Methodist tradition.
You see, some years ago, the church had a split, and broke away from the Methodist branch. (no surprise there, eh?) Since then, this nondenominational church has done away with baby baptisms, altar boys, saying the Lord's Prayer at every service (which used to be done until about one year ago), kneelers at the altar, and most recently, going up to the front to receive Communion. However, the pastor still wears a robe and collar. And about two years ago the church put up one of those eye sores, the white screen with all the chorus words on them as well as the sermon, in good ole PowerPoint. I'm sure if some folk had it their way, they would get rid of the beautiful mural of Jesus in front of the church and tell pastor to wear a suit. :?
Anyhow, I did get on a tangent. Sorry about that.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
Steven Barrett
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | Hadley, Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 980 |
| First Name: | Steven | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, Episcopal communicant, Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 1st, 2007 12:34 am |
|
Quite an interesting "tangent" Darlene. My family's baptist church every now and then has its monthly communion done "Roman style" and this has already created some sparks from the older members. I don't know what that Methodist lady was talking about since their communion doesn't involve the Real Presence so who in the first place would even know or care who went up the aisle or didn't? Well, nosey people would. All churches have those honkers.
Our minister doesn't wear a coat and tie unless it's a biggie like Easter or a memorial/funeral service. He's a fan of the Rick Warren and that kind of explains why we rarely see him wearing even a tie. There's something good to be said there because I've always thought the academic robes worn by ministers has a way of saying "Look at me, I'm so smart and you'd best pay attention to what I have to say because I have x y and z degrees."
I'm no fan of Episcopal theology, or what's left of it, but I do like their white "monk" robes, roped belts and double stoles. Better than suits or polo shirts and "gee I'm just like you" or the academic "I'm smarter than thee" look.
As for taking down Jesus' portrait, that would be a major big-time sacrilege, but I guess all too fitting in with the strip things down to the barest Cromwellianism that still plagues so much of evangelical worship these days. I've even read of a popular prof at Gordon Conwell eagerly saying he'd love to smash a few stained glass windows.
Popular, and "well-educated" or not, he's a Philistine prole when he talks like that.
It was great hearing your voice. You certainly helped to make one of Marcus' best shows even better! Excellent question! Joy Pinto was quite a guest and did a wonderful job of answering your question.
Keep it up! One night I'll turn on the Journey Home and watch both you and your other half telling your conversion story. With God's help it's a done deal!
s.
____________________
For anybody interested in reading commentary from a Catholic's socially conservative/fiscally liberal viewpoint, go to my new blog at http://www.politicsramble.com/ .
|
|
|
Br_Carlo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tyler, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 150 |
| First Name: | Br_Carlo (Vince Brach) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Presbyterian, Episcopalian, CATHOLIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 1st, 2007 07:43 am |
|
God's peace. Steve wrote: "There's something good to be said there because I've always thought the academic robes worn by ministers has a way of saying 'Look at me, I'm so smart and you'd best pay attention to what I have to say because I have x y and z degrees.'"
Actually, the Geneva gown you refer to is not so much an academic gown as it is a reflection of the gown worn by a civil magistrate--black to conceal the "person" of the minister and to emphasize the office above the man. However, that distinction is lost on the average pew-warmer, who sees "educated" when he sees that gown. Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
|
|
|
Current time is 11:23 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
