Is this a point of puzzlement to you?

[rcwitness]

You can look at the Mass from an emotional/spiritual or an intellectual level.

Intellectual could be religious and secular. Religious could be theology of communion/sacrifice, the liturgical/sacramental theology, ecclesiological, pastoral ( this list is not exhaustive).

Secular could be sociological, political, philosophical.

Emotional/spiritual would normally takes us into the very personal stories of why people go for mass, their sense of identity and fulfilment.

Its a rich thing - the mass. The problem emerge when people chooses to use it to denounce others for having a different view on only a narrow aspect of one of these many many rich levels of understanding of the mass. As with so many aspects of religions, the Mass sometimes become a tool of division among religionists rather than a point of unity of the children of God and the lens through which we see how similar our religions really are.

What about the Mass is “sociological, political, or philosophical”, with no religious basis?

 

[jimkhong]

What about the Mass is “sociological, political, or philosophical”, with no religious basis?

If you want religious basis, look at the line above

 

[rcwitness]

If you want religious basis, look at the line above

Yes, I saw, but you said there are simply secular meanings to the Mass. You gave those examples. I’m just wondering how the Mass can have meanings that have no religious basis.

 

[Wannano]

Well you tell me which Protestant Church is healing illnesses, casting out demons, and the “whole Church” is in fear of, and one chief steward goes “here and there among them all” and I’ll join that same day.

************Now it is my turn to admonish you to be careful you do not make promises you are not prepared to keep. Living in a mostly post-Christian nation (north America) we are not used to witnessing these events. There are however, reports of the effectiveness of many underground (churches) groups of believers and some denominational churches who in other countries are experiencing the leading and openness of the Holy Spirit in ways that resemble the NT church. The result is the winning of souls in droves and many even among the Muslim population.

My point is that there are aspects of the infant Church, under the Apostles, which is not given to its predecessor generations. What we have is faith, which the great signs were important to establish. Now, they are no longer necessary. Blessed are those who believe without “seeing”. There really isn’t a provable argument for the Primacy of the See of Rome. There isn’t a test that can be done to show the Catholic Eucharist is indeed changed by the Holy Spirit. And none of the churches are healing people of wounds and sicknesses out in the public and streets.

******** I am assuming you meant succeeding generations rather than predecessor? Is it really because the signs are not necessary any longer or is it because we are all to “civilized” or set in our pre-packaged ideas of what faith, church and practice should consist of? We, and myself included have a comfort level of lukewarmness that stifles the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately the televangelist type of ministry has exploited the real for profit in many cases as well.

What we believe is the historical account of the Church leadership through Rome, as the significant witness of St Peter’s predecessor by Apostolic succession. Even though these leaders who have been given a portion of this prime ministry, it hasn’t magically kept them from committing sinful deeds, like the rest of us. But we aren’t claiming them to be Christ Himself. We only claim them to be Christ’s stewards. We rejoice when they behave holy, and lament when they act shamefully. Yet, they are who they are because God put them there. And so for His sake, we serve under their jurisdiction.

In other posts it seems like there is confusion about the clerics being Christ Himself when they take His place in practice.

******My apologies for the format, i can not get the hang of the yellow quote button.

 

[rcwitness]

In other posts it seems like there is confusion about the clerics being Christ Himself when they take His place in practice.

I think I saw what you mean… from a PJM post? I don’t know if that’s an accurate way to express the priestly ministry. Christ is definitely represented and acts through them, but I have never heard (or read) the Church Teach that a priest “becomes Jesus, for an instant”.

Thanks for mentioning that. Maybe PJM can explain himself some?

******My apologies for the format, i can not get the hang of the yellow quote button.

Yes. What I usually do, is put my curse in the beginning of wherever I want to quote. Then click on the quote icon above. Then I delete the “end quote”. Then I place the curse at the end of where I want to quote, and delete the “beginning quote”.

Does that make sense?

 

[PJM]

Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut here. The early church practice looks and sounds more “protestant” than Catholic until the development of a common worship (Mass) along with the priesthood being divided between clerical and laity.

FYI

FROM OUR CATECHISM

1345 As early as the second century we have the witness of St. Justin Martyr for the basic lines of the order of the Eucharistic celebration. They have stayed the same until our own day for all the great liturgical families. St. Justin wrote to the pagan emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161) around the year 155, explaining what Christians did:

On the day we call the day of the sun, all who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place.
The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits.

When the reader has finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things.

Then we all rise together and offer prayers* for ourselves . . .and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions, and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation.

When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss.

Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren.

He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks (in Greek: eucharistian) that we have been judged worthy of these gifts.

When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: ‘Amen.’

When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the “eucharisted” bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent. END QUOTES

As for the early church:

The early church practice looks and sounds more “protestant” than Catholic until the development of a common worship (Mass) along with the priesthood being divided between clerical and laity.

In terestering cimment; HOW so:shrug:

GBY

Patrick

 

[joe371]

Why do you suppose the RCC

[1] Has the Mass?

[2] Makes it’s weekly attendance mandatory?

God Bless you

Patrick

The Mass is the new covenant Passover (“This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.") The old covenant passover (lamb was sacrificed and eaten) was transformed by Jesus into the new covenant passover (the Lamb of God is sacrificed and eaten), as per scripture. I always thought it was interesting, during the Last Supper, that Jesus interrupted the passover prior to the 4th cup of consummation, and walked away. That would have been unheard of…A little later He said, in the garden of Gethsemane - “Father, if you are willing, please take this cup of suffering away from me… yet your will to be done, not mine.” What cup? Finally, on the cross after receiving the sour wine He said it is finished: “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished,” and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” That was the 4th cup, which ended Jesus’ newly formed Passover.

If Jesus, during the Last Supper,had completed the Passover by taking the 4th cup (Hallel), and then walked away, there would be no new covenant Passover. The NT Passover begins with the Last Supper and ends when He says, on the cross - “it is finished”.

That is the Mass, and Jesus said: “do this in remembrance of me”.

 

[eddie_too]

because it is the greatest thing in this world and some people would not go if it were not mandatory.

what mother would allow her children to avoid eating regular food or drinking water, knowing that these are vital for their survival?

Holy Mother the Church loves her children and sometimes love requires discipline.

 

[Wannano]

I think I saw what you mean… from a PJM post? I don’t know if that’s an accurate way to express the priestly ministry. Christ is definitely represented and acts through them, but I have never heard (or read) the Church Teach that a priest “becomes Jesus, for an instant”.

Thanks for mentioning that. Maybe PJM can explain himself some?

Yes. What I usually do, is put my curse in the beginning of wherever I want to quote. Then click on the quote icon above. Then I delete the “end quote”. Then I place the curse at the end of where I want to quote, and delete the “beginning quote”.

Does that make sense?

I will try now.

Edit…it worked, thanks a billion!

 

[jimkhong]

Yes, I saw, but you said there are simply secular meanings to the Mass. You gave those examples. I’m just wondering how the Mass can have meanings that have no religious basis.

Different people see different things in the Mass. The Mass isn’t just for Catholics: it is for the world. An atheist can see something beautiful in the Mass in his/her atheism if they are open.

 

[jericho777]

Well you tell me which Protestant Church is healing illnesses, casting out demons, and the “whole Church” is in fear of, and one chief steward goes “here and there among them all” and I’ll join that same day.

It does happen at my church regularly and we have a monthly miracle and healing service. And yes even Catholics have attended and been healed. I personally have witnessed them firsthand.

 

[rcwitness]

Different people see different things in the Mass. The Mass isn’t just for Catholics: it is for the world. An atheist can see something beautiful in the Mass in his/her atheism if they are open.

That doesn’t mean the meaning of the Mass has no religious basis…

The Mass is not relavency.

 

[rcwitness]

It does happen at my church regularly and we have a monthly miracle and healing service. And yes even Catholics have attended and been healed. I personally have witnessed them firsthand.

I’m not denying miracles through various Christians. What about the other things I mentioned?

 

[jimkhong]

That doesn’t mean the meaning of the Mass has no religious basis…

The Mass is not relavency.

That is not what I am saying. Sometimes people may choose what they want to see in something you cherish. It may not be the fullness of what you see but that doesn’t mean what they saw is wrong. If atheists say they see something beautiful in the Mass but not the religious side of it, I will praise God for showing them that much and pray that I will be there when God chooses to reveal more of himself to them in the Mass.

We don’t need to insist that everyone in the world sees everything the way God has allowed us to see. That would be the sin of pride - I don’t think you have that. Sometimes we are the ones whom God has chosen not to reveal the fullness of understanding at that point in time and there is someone else realising that and waiting patiently & silently encouraging us on. I can only share with you my understanding that we are only a tiny part of God’s plans and we can only ask God include us in how he wishes to bring the world to himself - when we are ready.

 

[rcwitness]

That is not what I am saying. Sometimes people may choose what they want to see in something you cherish. It may not be the fullness of what you see but that doesn’t mean what they saw is wrong. If atheists say they see something beautiful in the Mass but not the religious side of it, I will praise God for showing them that much and pray that I will be there when God chooses to reveal more of himself to them in the Mass.

We don’t need to insist that everyone in the world sees everything the way God has allowed us to see. That would be the sin of pride - I don’t think you have that. Sometimes we are the ones whom God has chosen not to reveal the fullness of understanding at that point in time and there is someone else realising that and waiting patiently & silently encouraging us on. I can only share with you my understanding that we are only a tiny part of God’s plans and we can only ask God include us in how he wishes to bring the world to himself - when we are ready.

Sure, but if they continue to reject the true meaning, source, message and Person which the Mass is glorifying, then what does that mean???

 

[jimkhong]

Sure, but if they continue to reject the true meaning, source, message and Person which the Mass is glorifying, then what does that mean???

You know what rcwitness, you are correct in every aspect of everything you have said in every post on this thread. You win!!

May you see God next to you in your long journey ahead.

 

[rcwitness]

You know what rcwitness, you are correct in every aspect of everything you have said in every post on this thread. You win!!

May you see God next to you in your long journey ahead.

I didn’t win anything. I was asking a question. Sorry it rubbed you wrong. Peace.

 

[joe371]

Different people see different things in the Mass. The Mass isn’t just for Catholics: it is for the world. An atheist can see something beautiful in the Mass in his/her atheism if they are open.

What are the chances of an atheist seeing God in the Mass?

 

[rcwitness]

************Now it is my turn to admonish you to be careful you do not make promises you are not prepared to keep.**Living in a mostly post-Christian nation (north America) we are not used to witnessing these events. There are however, reports of the effectiveness of many underground (churches) groups of believers and some denominational churches who in other countries are experiencing the leading and openness of the Holy Spirit in ways that resemble the NT church. The result is the winning of souls in droves and many even among the Muslim population.

Yes, I don’t doubt there are “pockets” everywhere, where miracles of faith occur. This is not exclusive to the Catholic Church. Though, it’s not done as a sign, but rather answers to prayers. And it’s also just rumors. It may occur, or it may not. There are counterfeit performances. I would have to see some real stories to be convinced they are genuine healings done as a sign of God confirming a Communities justification in being independent of the See of Rome.

******** I am assuming you meant succeeding generations rather than predecessor?

Yes! Thanks for correcting me.

Is it really because the signs are not necessary any longer or is it because we are all to “civilized” or set in our pre-packaged ideas of what faith, church and practice should consist of? We, and myself included have a comfort level of lukewarmness that stifles the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately the televangelist type of ministry has exploited the real for profit in many cases as well.

Yeah, I don’t know why. Maybe you’re right, that we stifle the Spirit, through a lack of faith! As for “ideas of what the Church should consist of”, I believe His true Eucharist is the sign of His true Church. I realize that can sound circular, in its reasoning. But I don’t think it is circular, nor is it a reasoning by flesh and blood, but a conviction from learning Scripture/Tradition/Teaching, and listening to the voice within them. The mystery of Christ’s own flesh and blood overcoming human flesh and blood is profoundly realized in the Communion offered by the Catholic faith.

 

[PJM]

You can look at the Mass from an emotional/spiritual or an intellectual level.

Intellectual could be religious and secular. Religious could be theology of communion/sacrifice, the liturgical/sacramental theology, ecclesiological, pastoral ( this list is not exhaustive).

Secular could be sociological, political, philosophical.

Emotional/spiritual would normally takes us into the very personal stories of why people go for mass, their sense of identity and fulfilment.

Its a rich thing - the mass. The problem emerge when people chooses to use it to denounce others for having a different view on only a narrow aspect of one of these many many rich levels of understanding of the mass. As with so many aspects of religions, the Mass sometimes become a tool of division among religionists rather than a point of unity of the children of God and the lens through which we see how similar our religions really are.

Thank you, much to think about in your post

GBY