J
JMJ_coder
Guest
And I suppose you can read hearts and know the state of everyone going up to receive Communion.
- Status
J
Jane11
Guest
The desire for Latin Mass has nothing to do with thinking things were perfect. It is the desire to worship God in a true universal way so no person coming into any parish would ever feel out of place, awkward or not part of the Church.
Take us, for instance. We did not know one thing about the hand shaking thing or when it would occur because depending on the priest it would be at one time or another or what the protocol was, we do not know the new Creed, we do not know the reponses back to the priest, any new prayers, we had to figure out which line to get into order to receive undefiled Host, we didn’t know what to do because we could not kneel in receiving the host, etc. In other words: we felt like complete strangers in the Church!
. The fact of the matter is that Mass is not the same no matter which parish/town/country you are in which was what the Church fathers wanted to happen so no one would ever feel like a stranger no matter where they had to travel.Another, and way more important point, is; the desire for Latin Mass is the desire to see God respected at all times by the priest not turning his back on Him.
I’m sure others will add to the list of reasons but I don’t think anyone would be stupid enough to think the original Christianity was perfect at any time because we’re all imperfect - have been and always will be - no matter how hard we’re working on our interior lives. This is a good thread and it will be intesting to see it go on!
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
This is just a wrong statement.
Any one who follows what the Church says and teaches is doing the “proper observance of the Faith”.
To make is seem that only “Traditionalists” are doing so is wrong.
So that “myth” seems to be true.
P
pnewton
Guest
I do not understand. In order to receive communion one does not need to be perfect. On just can not be in a state of mortal sin. Is this different at the TLM?
J
John_Grudzien
Guest
By the way they act in church before communion and during Mass, and by the way they dress, I believe you can get a pretty good idea!And I suppose you can read hearts and know the state of everyone going up to receive Communion.
J
John_Grudzien
Guest
Couldn’t have said it better myself. You like the NO, fine, I don’t begrudge you your preferences. Why don’t I and peoplle like me deserve the same considerations?The desire for Latin Mass has nothing to do with thinking things were perfect. It is the desire to worship God in a true universal way so no person coming into any parish would ever feel out of place, awkward or not part of the Church.
Take us, for instance. We did not know one thing about the hand shaking thing or when it would occur because depending on the priest it would be at one time or another or what the protocol was, we do not know the new Creed, we do not know the reponses back to the priest, any new prayers, we had to figure out which line to get into order to receive undefiled Host, we didn’t know what to do because we could not kneel in receiving the host, etc. In other words: we felt like complete strangers in the Church!
Another, and way more important point, is; the desire for Latin Mass is the desire to see God respected at all times by the priest not turning his back on Him.
I’m sure others will add to the list of reasons but I don’t think anyone would be stupid enough to think the original Christianity was perfect at any time because we’re all imperfect - have been and always will be - no matter how hard we’re working on our interior lives. This is a good thread and it will be intesting to see it go on!
J
John_Grudzien
Guest
But I don’t understand…wouldn’t you want to be in as high a state of grace and cleanliness of soul before you invited Our Lord in? Are most people today either to scared to make frequent confessions (At least once a month as recommended by Holy Mother Church) or do they feel that no one has the right to tell them what they do in the course of their lives is sinful. If they feel that way, then there is no use for Confession as they’re all saints anyway!!!
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
Are you implying that when you receive from a EMHC you are not receiving *** the Body of Christ ***
and that somehow the bread that was concecrated minutes before has become "defiled"?
I thought that this thread was about dispeling myths about “Traditional Catholics”.
If this is indeed what you are eluding too, then I think that you are proving that much of what I have thought about “Traditional Catholics” is not myth.
F
floresco
Guest
The myth is that all traditional Catholics are the same. There have been trads posting in this thread who have views that you would not find at all objectionable. When you take the view that you object to and treat it as representative, you are creating barriers.I thought that this thread was about dispeling myths about “Traditional Catholics”.
If this is indeed what you are eluding too, then I think that you are proving that much of what I have thought about “Traditional Catholics” is not myth.
P
pnewton
Guest
That wasn’t the question I asked. I would prefer to be as full of grace at all times as possible, but I am not. There has been no time, ever, that I believe I was in a state worthy of receiving the Lord. * Lord I am not worthy to receive you… etc. *
Do TLM Catholics think they are holy enough to earn the right to the Eucharist???
F
floresco
Guest
Speaking for myself, absolutely not. We may say “non sum dignus” instead “I am not worthy” but it means the same thing.
But that really is not what the poster you are replying to meant. He was talking about the need for Confession. It is because we know that we are not holy enough that we want God’s help to make us more fit to receive Him.
M
MarkThompson
Guest
Out of curiosity, do women say “Domine, non sum digna”? I know that for the congregation to say this line is a modernist innovation with zero basis in the Roman liturgy and thus no rubric, but I wonder whether people have sufficient Latin to realize the meaning.
P
pnewton
Guest
Oh. Well I think it would be good not to assume someone has not made confession as needed. That doesn’t seem very Christian.
R
russell007
Guest
Since no one has actually answerd your question and it was my post Heres what the Q&A
from the Baltimore Cat tells us
Question 255:
Does he who receives Communion in mortal sin receive the body and blood of Christ?
Answer:
He who receives Communion in mortal sin receives the body and blood of Christ, but does not receive His grace, and he commits a great sacrilege.
Question 256:
Is it enough to be free from mortal sin to receive Plentifully the graces of Holy Communion? A.To receive plentifully the graces of Holy Communion it is not enough to be free from mortal sin, but we should be free from all affection to venial sin, and should make acts of faith, hope, and love.
St. Paul’s epistle to the Corinthians, in part 14 it notes: "And on the Lord’s day, gather together and break bread and give thanks, first confessing your sins so that your sacrifice might be pure.
Acts 20:11 “When Paul had gone up and had broken bread and eaten…” St. Paul explained clearly what “breaking bread” meant. 1 Cor 10:16 “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the Blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the Body of Christ?” St. Paul continued, 1 Cor 11:27 “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord.” St. Paul in these words confirmed Catholic teaching that the “bread … of the Lord” is truly Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, and that the “cup of the Lord” is the same substance: “Whoever … eats the bread or drinks the cup … will be guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord.”
EWTN
A serious, grave or mortal sin is the knowing and willful violation of God’s law in a serious matter, for example, idolatry, adultery, murder, slander. These are all things gravely contrary to the love we owe God and, because of Him, our neighbor. As Jesus taught, when condemning even looking at a woman lustfully, sin can be both interior (choices of the will alone) or exterior (choices of the will carried into action). A man who willfully desires to fornicate, steal, murder or some other grave sin, has already seriously offended God by choosing interiorly what God has prohibited.
Mortal sin is called mortal because it is the “spiritual” death of the soul (separation from God). If we are in the state of grace it loses this supernatural life for us. If we die without repenting we will lose Him for eternity. However, by turning our hearts back to Him and receiving the Sacrament of Penance we are restored to His friendship. Catholics are not allowed to receive Communion if they have unconfessed mortal sins.
P
PilgrimToChrist
Guest
The rubric is there in my 1962 (SSPX) Missal, it says “Then the communicants add three times, striking their breasts:” I’m not sure when that rubric was added but it seems rash to call it “a modernist innovation”:
Domine, non sum dignus, ut intres sub tectum meum: sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea.
Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof: but only say the word, and my servant shall be healed. ~ Mt 8:8
I’m not going to say it is a “modernist innovation” for the faithful to say this. We say it at my parish (FSSP), along with a few other server responses (nothing approaching a full “dialogue Mass” though). In response to a question after class (we have classes before Mass sometimes) last week, someone asked Father what he thought of the “dialogue Mass” and he said that we use a “modified dialogue Mass” with a few responses but that trying to do a full one kills the silence (interior and exterior), which is important, and it just becomes a cacophony of voices stumbling over the Latin. But this particular response is good for the faithful to say because it is in preparation for our Communion.
I like my priest’s suggestion that everyone should own a Missal and use it at least on occasion, but he applied St. Theresa of Avila’s counsel to use a prayer book or other spiritual work to focus the mind but if it becomes a hindrance, set it down. I think it is good for people to know the prayers of the Mass and to own them, but it is also important for people to just focus on meditation. Certain prayers of High Mass, such as the Kyrie and Agnus Dei are so moving that I rarely want to keep up with following along the priest’s part. Sometimes if I have trouble focusing, I’ll follow along during the Canon but it’s becoming less often as I become more used to the traditional Mass and the spirituality it engenders.
P
PilgrimToChrist
Guest
I think if you are accusing a particular person of such a thing, yes, but if it is a general criticism of why the priests are never available for Confession and only advertise a half-hour per week and aren’t hearing Confessions before and after Mass, etc. then it really is a criticism of the priest for not doing his duty and emphasizing the necessity of Confession. Of course, priests are busy but they often have time to hear Confession even outside of times scheduled for it, it is their second most important duty, after saying the Mass. But it’s a question of emphasis and people are fickle, if the priest doesn’t emphasize the necessity of Confession then the people will just ignore and avoid it, leading to sacrilegious Communions and lost souls. The priest needs to push Confession, especially in this age.
We had First Communion a couple weeks ago and you could tell there were many people there who were either not Catholic or at least not used to the Traditional Mass. So Father, before the homily, reminded people that only Catholics in good standing and a state of Grace could receive Communion and to please receive it kneeling (if possible, of course) and on the tongue. He specified that people need to be going to Confession regularly, at least once a month, be in accordance with the Church’s marriage laws, not be using contraception or using NFP to avoid pregnancy without a good reason*. IIRC, he made a similar announcement at Christmas. There are always long lines for Confession before and after Mass, which is a good sign (though it also means on potluck days, Father often comes in to a table already picked clean… ;_; ).
* Sometimes I feel like the Church is always hung up on sexual issues, but then I remember how much the world is hung up on sexual issues and how the Church has to respond to that. Also figures which suggest 90% of married Catholics use contraception are very disheartening.
M
MarkThompson
Guest
Please tell me you’re not trusting your conduct at Mass to English rubrics!
Hopefully someone can point out where all this business of “congregational participation” is to be found in the Missale Romanum or another document properly altering the liturgy of the Mass, rather than just in some hand missal. And when was this behavior introduced into the Mass? On whose authority? The whole “dialogue Mass” seems to be a recent innovation from people in the 20s and 30s who were unsatisfied with the Mass as it had been handed down since Gregory the Great. I’m not sure what to think about that.
By the way, anima ≠ “servant.”
P
pnewton
Guest
I’ve always found lines for Confession, so I guess that’s why I wasn’t relating. My priest mentioned that between all those entering the Church and the normal requirements of Holy Week, he put in thirty hour in the confessional. Obviously Holy Week is an exception of course, but Confession is a major part of our parish life.
R
revert_jen
Guest
According to an old hand missal I have (copyright 1959/1963, yes, years before I was born):
In recent years the Dialogue Mass or Missa Recitata (which combines features of both High and Low Mass) has become quite popular. …] On September 3, 1958, the Sacred Congregation of Rites issued an Instruction greatly urging the use of the Dialogue Mass. To this end, it stipulated that the faithful may participate in a low Mass in any of the following degrees: …] (2) by reciting all the responses said by the Server plus the triple Domine non sum dignus at the Communion of the people; …]
So, I looked it up and there is a document, De musica sacra et sacra liturgia, which does address this in section 31.
Whoever introduced it, it wasn’t people in their 20s and 30s who weren’t born yet. Aside from anything else, the missal in question isn’t a reprinted edition of a missal, but a genuine old one with a calendar that started with 1963, which I bought second-hand.
–Jen
M
MarkThompson
Guest
Good to know. The references at Wikipedia indicate that several of these innovations were allowed from 1922 in more limited contexts, but I hadn’t yet seen a missal that actually included rubrics for it.
- Status