Question Box: Use of Communion rails in churches

Q. When on vacation recently we went to a church that still had and used a Communion rail. Are Communion rails coming back?

A. For those who may be unfamiliar, many churches in the past had a low railing at the base of the steps to the sanctuary with an opening in the middle, whereby the priest and others assisting at Mass would enter.

During the Communion Rite, rather than coming up in a line, the faithful would come forward, find a place to kneel (or stand, if unable to kneel) along the Communion rail and the priest would distribute Communion typewriter-style (left to right and back again). This is still, typically, how Communion is administered in the pre-conciliar liturgy (“Traditional Latin Mass”) and in places where the Communion rail is still in use.

I suppose there may be some advantages to this. It might be slightly more efficient. Then again, efficiency is not exactly a liturgical virtue, at least not at the expense of reverence. Another advantage may be that only those who feel properly disposed to receive Communion would come forward. As it is done now, everyone feels pushed out of the pew in a kind of conga line and may even feel pressured to receive Communion, regardless of their circumstances. In general, perhaps an argument could be made for how the Communion rail facilitates a deeper sense of reverence for the Eucharist.

Of course, there are disadvantages as well. For one, it would not seem to allow for the distribution of the Precious Blood. People who tend to like Communion rails would probably say, “Exactly! What’s the problem?” But, as I have covered in a previous column, the offering of both species (the body and blood) of Christ is a value, at least in the conciliar liturgy.

Another disadvantage: the Communion rail may also take away from the sense of the Communion procession, the idea of the Church on pilgrimage in this communal act of receiving the Eucharist. It is not a “me and my Jesus” moment.

For some, the Communion rail is not only a physical barrier but a psychological and spiritual one as well. Again, one person’s disadvantage is another person’s advantage. Those who prefer Communion rails might say, “Amen! The sanctuary should be set apart as a sacred space.” Others would see it more as a wall to Communion than a gate. As with so many things, there are competing values and, therefore, competing preferences.

In some places, Communion rails never went away. Depending on the age and architecture of the church, it might not be uncommon to see them still. Though, in the years following Vatican II many places had them removed, often reincorporating the stone or wood elsewhere in the Church. Recently, I have heard of some churches putting them back in. My rule of thumb is not to fight with a building and try to make it something it was not intended to be, so I would probably neither remove nor put in a Communion rail.

A hybrid option that has popped up is setting out kneelers in the main aisle for those who wish to receive kneeling. My experience is that that those who wish to receive Communion kneeling will do so no matter what. To my mind, the placing of kneelers is a bit cumbersome if not an actual tripping hazard.

At the very least, we should be careful about “magical thinking” that says, “If we only put back (or removed) Communion rails, all the Church’s problems would be solved.” If only it were so simple.

(Father Thom Hennen serves as the pastor of Sacred Heart Cathedral in Davenport and vicar general for the Diocese of Davenport. Send questions to messenger@davenportdiocese.org)