There was a Communion Rail and Everyone Survived

RileyG said:

I’m surprised my parish isn’t on that list. We have incense almost every Sunday and the altar rail
Is always used.

Click to expand...

Most parishes in Lincoln will probably eventually qualify.

chevyontheriver said:

I was there too. There was a quickly done English version in 1965 that was pretty much a direct translation of the TLM. Then in 1970 we got something very different. Archbishop Lefebvre had no issue with the 1965 stuff but had a cow with the 1970 stuff. For him it wasn't about the language. It was about the actual rite.

Some bishops and priests DO mandate that communion in the hand is the only way to receive. But they are wrong in mandating that. Some bishops and priests DO mandate that communion must be received standing. But they are wrong in mandating that too.

It was the normal way for every Latin rite Catholic for well over a thousand years.

Jesus never mandated any method of reception.

The practice was the norm.

What are you actually trying to say in that sentence?

I'll grant you that, even though we did have parallel Latin and English guides to the mass in those bad old days.

Some of us actually learned the Latin. I guess others didn't bother.

What does the quality of a PA system have to do with anything? Were there no valid masses until PA systems matured?

Click to expand...

I know of no Bishops who mandates receiving Communion in the hand, I've never seen this, but if that's
the case, as a former EMHC, it makes sense.

FYI, the Norm before Vatican II has changed. If you read to the end of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM, it allowed for experimentation and for the bishops to decide on which way to go.
What you see today is the result of that experimentation and what the bishops of each conference decided on.

Receiving in the hand while standing became the norm and what the majority of Catholics do. As a former
EMHC, placing the host on the tongue while the person is standing, especially if they're taller than you,
becomes unsanitary. Those who insist on kneeling, generally draw attention to themselves as if they are
more holy than the rest of the congregation.

Also, just reading the parallel English to the Latin is foolishness when you can hear the Mass in your own language.
Not everyone is capable of learning Latin, and it goes against loving your neighbor to try and force them to hear
Mass in Latin rather than what they can understand.

Lastly, the quality of the PA system had plenty to do with hearing the priest and altar boys, as they mimicked
through the Latin words my rote, saying the words so fast that even they couldn't understand what they were
saying.

Many Catholics at Mass, merely said the Rosary, and they stood and knelt as others did in order to be the same.
Vatican II called for the congregation to be full participants of the Mass rather than just observers, which they
were in the TLM days.

JimR-OCDS said:

I know of no Bishops who mandates receiving Communion in the hand, I've never seen this, but if that's
the case, as a former EMHC, it makes sense.

Click to expand...

The GIRM allows reception on the tongue if the recipient wishes to receive it that way. But you have no problem banning it.

JimR-OCDS said:

FYI, the Norm before Vatican II has changed. If you read to the end of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM, it allowed for experimentation and for the bishops to decide on which way to go.
What you see today is the result of that experimentation and what the bishops of each conference decided on.

Click to expand...

So things contrary to Sacrosanctum Concilium are allowed because 'experimentation'. Just like Sacrosanctum Concilium said that chant should be retained and it's all but disappeared.

JimR-OCDS said:

Receiving in the hand while standing became the norm and what the majority of Catholics do. As a former
EMHC, placing the host on the tongue while the person is standing, especially if they're taller than you,
becomes unsanitary.

Click to expand...

Unsanitary? Do you also think a common cup is unsanitary? Should that also be banned?

JimR-OCDS said:

Those who insist on kneeling, generally draw attention to themselves as if they are
more holy than the rest of the congregation.

Click to expand...

Judge others much?

JimR-OCDS said:

Also, just reading the parallel English to the Latin is foolishness when you can hear the Mass in your own language.
Not everyone is capable of learning Latin, and it goes against loving your neighbor to try and force them to hear
Mass in Latin rather than what they can understand.

Click to expand...

Two year olds in Rome learned Latin. Four year olds mastered the five declensions and the gerunds and subjunctives. Not everyone is capable of learning Latin. A few people cannot master any language and remain unable to communicate. English is a much more complicated language than Latin. It's just that some people have it in their heads that they cannot possibly learn enough of it to attend a Latin mass. So ban all Latin masses because 'loving your neighbor'.

JimR-OCDS said:

Lastly, the quality of the PA system had plenty to do with hearing the priest and altar boys, as they mimicked
through the Latin words my rote, saying the words so fast that even they couldn't understand what they were
saying.

Click to expand...

Do you speak from personal experience with this? If so, you were very poorly trained as an altar boy.

JimR-OCDS said:

Many Catholics at Mass, merely said the Rosary, and they stood and knelt as others did in order to be the same.
Vatican II called for the congregation to be full participants of the Mass rather than just observers, which they
were in the TLM days.

Click to expand...

Are current attendees of the TLM just observers? Were all attendees of the TLM before 1965 just observers? Is it even possible, in your opinion to attend a TLM and be an full and active participant in the mass? Are no attendees of the NO just observers and all of them full and active participants?

RileyG said:

I'm not going to turn this into a debate of receiving on the hand vs tongue, but I will share an anecdote.

When I have received on my hand, USUALLY there are particles left behind. When I was younger and serving as an altar server, particles were always on the communion paten (the golden plate held under the hand or the chin of the communicant). Always.

I think people should have the freedom of choice to choose how they want to receive. BOTH are approved, regardless.

(Also, if one has ever attended a the Divine Liturgy in the Eastern Rite, everyone receives the Holy Eucharist from the same liturgical spoon. Even the infants and toddlers. In some Slavic traditions, the communicants will close their mouth on the spoon).

Click to expand...

In all of my years receiving Holy Communion in the hand, there were never particles left behind. This is because the host were not
stale.

Like I said, no Bishop I know of, mandated to receive Holy Communion in the hand.

chevyontheriver said:

The GIRM allows reception on the tongue if the recipient wishes to receive it that way. But you have no problem banning it.

So things contrary to Sacrosanctum Concilium are allowed because 'experimentation'. Just like Sacrosanctum Concilium said that chant should be retained and it's all but disappeared.

Unsanitary? Do you also think a common cup is unsanitary? Should that also be banned?

Judge others much?

Two year olds in Rome learned Latin. Four year olds mastered the five declensions and the gerunds and subjunctives. Not everyone is capable of learning Latin. A few people cannot master any language and remain unable to communicate. English is a much more complicated language than Latin. It's just that some people have it in their heads that they cannot possibly learn enough of it to attend a Latin mass. So ban all Latin masses because 'loving your neighbor'.

Do you speak from personal experience with this? If so, you were very poorly trained as an altar boy.

Are current attendees of the TLM just observers? Were all attendees of the TLM before 1965 just observers? Is it even possible, in your opinion to attend a TLM and be an full and active participant in the mass? Are no attendees of the NO just observers and all of them full and active participants?

Click to expand...

The GIRM allows reception of Holy Communion on the tongue but does not mandate that Holy Communion be
received in the hand.

The final draft of Sacrosanctum Concilium was not made until the council closed. Before that, Bishops were
allowed to experiment with various things like, celebrating the Mass in the vernacular and reception
while standing, according to the US Conference. Nothing contradicted Sacrosanctum Concilium.

I don't care how young some children learn Latin. Most people do not understand Latin, nor could they. My
parents never understood Latin, and me, despite memorizing Latin when trying to become an altar boy,
I failed as I never stayed with it.

Receiving from the cup is indeed unsanitary. I didn't use to think so until I ended up in the hospital
for a week after getting a blood infection from only God knows were. However, what I learned is that
all it would take is for a person with a broken tooth to infect others, especially the EMHC. One guy who
used to receive from the cup when I was EMHC, had a large bushy mustache, which I'm sure ended up
in the precious blood when he received from the cup.

"Are current attendees of the TLM just observers?"

Many are just observers according to those who have shared their experience on the issue.
They couldn't understand the prayers and looking at the English translation next to the Latin,
was distracting. Why should they have to go through that? Just attend the Novus Ordo celebrated
in their native tongue,

JimR-OCDS said:

In all of my years receiving Holy Communion in the hand, there were never particles left behind. This is because the host were not
stale.

Like I said, no Bishop I know of, mandated to receive Holy Communion in the hand.

Click to expand...

I’ve never noticed any particles left behind, either. If there ever is, I’d just lick them off my hand. I can’t see what everybody is doing when they go to receive, but from what I have seen, everybody at my church receives in the hand.

FaithT said:

I’ve never noticed any particles left behind, either. If there ever is, I’d just lick them off my hand. I can’t see what everybody is doing when they go to receive, but from what I have seen, everybody at my church receives in the hand.

Click to expand...

For the past couple of weeks, a host has fallen on the floor and the priest has had to pick it up. People receive communion at altar rails.

Michie said:

Over this past weekend, I headed to Louisville to celebrate a birthday, and this morning went to Mass at St. Martin of Tours Shrine.

Louisville has a wealth of rich liturgy – hopefully it will survive – partly because the Catholic history of this area runs so deep – really to the beginning of post-Colonial Catholic life in the United States.

Today, we were at the Shrine of St. Martin of Tours – home of two important relics

I’m just going to share some photos. This was Novus Ordo, much Latin, a powerful 4-member schola (my Offspring and I were both shocked when we were walking back from Communion to see, up in the loft, that there were only four voices filling that space), a COMMUNION RAIL, Mass celebrated AD ORIENTEM and lots and lots of chant.

(Followed at noon by a TLM, BTW)

And messages, in both bulletin, worship aid and homily about Jesus’ mandate to serve the poor and his welcoming to children – of whom there were… a lot.

Once more, I can’t help but pointing out the utter insanity and yes, stupidity of bishops who go to war against all of these elements. Y’all are just dumb. Stop it.

Continued below.

There was a Communion Rail and Everyone Survived

Over this past weekend, I headed to Louisville to celebrate a birthday, and this morning went to Mass at St. Martin of Tours Shrine. Louisville has a wealth of rich liturgy – hopefully it wil…

amywelborn.wordpress.com

Click to expand...

I'm in Louisville. I go to St. Martin of Tours frequently.

Lady Bug said:

For the past couple of weeks, a host has fallen on the floor and the priest has had to pick it up. People receive communion at altar rails.

Click to expand...

That happens when people receive on the tongue too.

JimR-OCDS said:

That happens when people receive on the tongue too.

Click to expand...

It does, that's the point I was making.

JimR-OCDS said:

The GIRM allows reception of Holy Communion on the tongue but does not mandate that Holy Communion be
received in the hand.

Click to expand...

Wow! We do agree on something.

The GIRM does not mandate Holy Communion be received in the hand, but allows for reception on the tongue. It takes eager bishops and priests to forbid what the GIRM allows. I don't know if you caught the interview between Jonathan Roumie and Fr. Mike Schmidtz recently where Roumie recounts attempting to receive the Eucharist on the tongue and while kneeling. Wasn't allowed.

JimR-OCDS said:

The final draft of Sacrosanctum Concilium was not made until the council closed. Before that, Bishops were
allowed to experiment with various things like, celebrating the Mass in the vernacular and reception
while standing, according to the US Conference. Nothing contradicted Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Click to expand...

Will you concede that a thing or three AFTER the council did contradict Sacrosanctum Concilium?

JimR-OCDS said:

I don't care how young some children learn Latin. Most people do not understand Latin, nor could they. My
parents never understood Latin, and me, despite memorizing Latin when trying to become an altar boy,
I failed as I never stayed with it.

Click to expand...

The Latin necessary to understand all the common parts of the mass is indeed minimal. But if you didn't stay with it I understand. It was all hocus pocus to you.

JimR-OCDS said:

Receiving from the cup is indeed unsanitary. I didn't use to think so until I ended up in the hospital
for a week after getting a blood infection from only God knows were. However, what I learned is that
all it would take is for a person with a broken tooth to infect others, especially the EMHC. One guy who
used to receive from the cup when I was EMHC, had a large bushy mustache, which I'm sure ended up
in the precious blood when he received from the cup.

Click to expand...

So, ban that too?

JimR-OCDS said:

Many are just observers according to those who have shared their experience on the issue.
They couldn't understand the prayers and looking at the English translation next to the Latin,
was distracting. Why should they have to go through that? Just attend the Novus Ordo celebrated
in their native tongue,

Click to expand...

If you cannot understand Latin at all, not even the common and repeated parts, not even with a Latin/English guide, then by all means avoid a TLM. But do you have to have it banned for everybody, or make it as difficult as possible for them? Couldn't someone willing to put in a little time and a little effort to learn Latin be allowed to attend a Latin mass? Or go to a parish that has and uses a communion rail? Or that allows the faithful, if they desire it, to receive the Eucharist on the tongue? It's a bit snooty to say, well at least you qualified it to say only 'many', who currently attend the TLM are clueless observers. When we look at multiple measures of belief and practice there are real distinctions between TLM attendees and NO attendees. Mass attendance frequency differs, frequency of confession differs, average contributions to the parish differ, beliefs in key doctrines differ, support for abortion differs, all sorts of things differ. But you say that many who attend the TLM are just observers. What of those people who attend the NO? Many of them (us, I go to a NO mass almost all the time) do't show up very often even though I think you would presume that they are all active participants. What's going on there?