Belief in the Real Presence from 87% to 34%. Hypotheses on why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximilian75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
For those who want to go back, this is a good pic for reflection. Four priests, each with their own server, celebrating Mass alone. I guess they thought 4 Masses is better than 1.
 
I thought of this thread at Mass this morning.

Today is Remembrance Sunday, when we remember the sacrifices of those who have died in the World Wars and subsequent conflicts. Our priest began the Mass with the two-minute silence (it was 11am), and then we sang Abide With Me as the opening hymn.

In his homily, he talked about the importance of remembering and then moved on to talking about the Real Presence and the words of Jesus - “Do this in memory of me”. He concluded it all by saying that because we take Jesus into our bodies when we consume the Blessed Sacrament, we have to follow His instruction. It’s not enough to just feel good about our own internal spiritual welfare - the real difference we make is when we reflect and demonstrate the love of Jesus to other people, and that’s when we’re really remembering him.

That’s a paraphrase of course, but I thought it was an excellent homily. Our priest doesn’t use notes, he walks around whilst he’s talking and he has an informal style - but he still gets his message across!
 
Don_Ruggero said:
It is sad that these restorationists try to so grossly distort the reality of our post-conciliar Church – and sadder than there are those who are taken in by them.
Click to expand...
There’s a difference between restorationists and people who fully accept the authority of Vat II and merely are interested in how to help people to genuinely get closer to Christ. And are interested in attending a liturgy that is beautiful and inspires a sense of the sacred.

My experience teaching religion to High-school students is that they don’t care too much about the real presence or the mass. But I really think that the EF, or at least some of the practices of the EF are attractive to young people who are not aware of the significance or the meaning of the mass. Beauty is a universal language. Many churches have been stripped of their beauty and replaced with bland modern art. It’s not fair to label people who want to see a beautiful liturgy restorationists.
 
The modern world DEMANDS proof of everything, no-one is willing to just accept and believe!

Thanks for the article, it was a real history lesson on how things change over time.

Personally, I feel belief in the real presence is what is really important. If you believe it is Jesus in your hand, or on your tongue, the reverence will be there.

Now, another request to hold back the torches and pitchforks…wouldn’t Jesus simply vacate the host if someone lacked proper reverence or belief? He IS all powerful after all…forgive me if this situation should be inuitively obvious to the most casual of observers, but I missed a year of catechism in seventh grade when I was hospitalized with rheumatic fever…right around the time all this in the hand vs the mouth stuff started!
 
I think the modern world always demanding proof is more flattering than it deserves.

Large segments of the population are willing to endorse poorly supported ideas if it attractive to their interests; “Such and such isn’t really addictive/harmful. I deserve such and such.” In part because of the internet, many are saying that we’re going through a mini Dark Age. Conspiracy theories + borderline opinions are experiencing surges across the board.

Any lack of belief in the Real Presence just comes down to catechesis and witness.

It is both absurd and insulting to say that changing something cosmetic, such as receiving kneeling versus standing has any significant impact. It suggests that there is some sort of cheap shortcut to getting the Church to its peak strength. Cardinal St Charles Borromeo famously and succinctly described the three things required for genuine reform: heroic works of love, heroic works of obedience, and heroic suffering. That is what has always been and always will be required.

The Church will constantly be renewing & reforming & developing herself until the end of time. It is a necessity to the human condition. Each new generation needs to be interiorly converted, again and again and again. This was the pattern of the Israelite tribes in the Old Testament and it will always be the pattern of the Church.
 
Last edited:
TK421 said:
It is both absurd and insulting to say that changing something cosmetic, such as receiving kneeling versus standing has any significant impact
Click to expand...
Not really. It’s simply suggesting that outwardly showing reverence leads to an inward expression of reverence too.
 
For a particular individual that can be the case, but I guarantee you: rewind to 1959 and within that cultural timeframe, kneeling was just rote business as usual for any nominal Catholic clocking their time card at Mass.

There are no outward expressions / cheat codes that can artificially generate reverence in a soul. There are no shortcuts in the pursuit for holiness, except for abandonment to God. Daily obedience, daily repentance, daily prayer, daily acts of love, and perseverance
 
Last edited:
I never said there were cheat codes. But I don’t think greater reverence for the Eucharist can do any harm and I actually do think it leads to a deeper faith if combined with catechesis.
 
JourneyHome said:
And standing today for Communion is just rote business as usual for nominal Catholics. As is Communion in the hand.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “nominal” Catholics? Yes, standing and receiving in the hand are standard operating procedure in 2017 in most places.

But the implication here seems to be that somehow those that follow the usually accepted standards are just “nominal” in their catholicism. Please correct me if I’m wrong
 
We could probably continue this argument all week. I think that basically it can’t hurt to be as reverent as possible and to do this outwardly as well as interiorly. They both affect each other.
I do wonder why kneeling to receive is such a contentious issue. It seems very obvious. If Jesus appeared to you would you not kneel?
 
Another interesting thing is how people say “it’s enough to be reverent in the soul”. If one is reverent in the soul what objection would they have to outward signs of reverence?
 
JourneyHome said:
Just saying that it doesn’t really matter what’s done in the case of some people. Some people can hear a reading at Mass in English and still have no idea what it was about five minutes after Mass.
Click to expand...
Some people get training at their jobs on Monday morning, and forget what they learned after lunch.

you’ll have that.
 
Reverence is kind of like modesty. When we notice it, we appreciate it. Often it is not noticed, not taken as seriously. But when it is absent, something changes within the hearts of those surrounding. Reverence is a respect shown to God, it has always been known and understood that kneeling naturally displays this. Receiving on the tongue displays this as well, because we are not worthy of touching Him, this humbles us.

Modesty is similar because it shows a respect for self and others to not lead them to temptation. The results aren’t always speedy or obvious, but they are there as one can tell in this day in age the sin of impurity has increased like no other time.
 
Last edited:
twf said:
There is nothing wrong with receiving standing… that is the venerable tradition of the East… but the sudden shift had to have a psychological impact.
Click to expand...
I agree as per standing. But from what I understand in the Orthodox Church the priest spoons communion into your mouth. While you stand to receive there is still sacredness expressed in how you receive. And the whole confecting of the Eucharist takes place with an elaborate ceremony behind the iconostasis.
 
JourneyHome said:
Unfortunately this is an all too common problem. The “Middle Ages” get denigrated as somehow being a horrible time for the Church, and practices that are associated with the Middle Ages…sometimes inaccurately…are criticized.
Click to expand...
Yes its very sad. I find Saints i greatly admire and seek to emulate from the middle ages.
 
I agree with most of your post and definitely the spirit of it - but we shouldn’t assume that kneeling has always been the norm. The ecumenical council of Nicaea actually forbid kneeling on a Sundays. Standing in worship on Sundays was seen as symbolic of the resurrection. This remains the Eastern tradition to this day. Kneeling is seen as an act of penance suitable for other days / times. In the West, kneeling can signify penance but it also signifies adoration and thus gradually became the norm for Sundays.
For the record, I am a big fan of receiving kneeling.
 
Augustinian said:
40.png
Lovinglight:
I find that the rubrics for the laity in the pews arent followed at all.

I try to emulate the rubrics in the pew but also the reverence i see in more traditional videos.
Click to expand...
“Rubrics” are the rules for the priests and other who are conducting the mass or other liturgy- not the faithful or others who are attending. There are no “rubrics for the laity”.
Click to expand...
Im not sure what its called for the layity but in the Novus Ordo’s ive attended its an outline of the Mass and prayers that tells u when to sit/stand/kneel/bow. Of which ive noticed alot has been removed. The Bishop told the Priests not to have the layity kneel during the Agneus Dei…those outlines were replaced…they just keep changing it seems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top