I think that you are proving my point with this comment. The same scientific poll would give the same result between consecrated and unconsecrated hosts. That is one of the reasons why the Church has liturgical norms. The liturgy is for God and not for us, God would now the difference.
I think you may be arguing a different issue than the one that was being discussed above, which arose with the comments:
God has no need of anything; the Mass, like all the Sacraments and the very sacrifice of Christ, is really a gift that God has given us. (We can indeed show our gratitude for that gift, in part, by treating it carefully, as a prized possession.
)I was the one the wrote the “disgree” comment. And I was no way insinuating that Catholics alone should be the only ones reading scripture out loud. BUT, I disagree that there would not be a difference between an atheist being the reader and a Catholic, or a Methodist, or a Lutheran, etc. etc. Ever listen to someone read something that they don’t believe in and then listened to someone that fully believes in the text before them? There is a difference.I think you may be arguing a different issue than the one that was being discussed above, which arose with the comments:
Maybe it’s because the words are going to sound exactly the same no matter whose mouth they come out of.
Disagree. There is HUGE difference between someone that understands they are reading sacred scripture and the Catholic liturgy and someone that just thinks it words on a page that they are reading out loud.I agree with you that the nature of the Mass as a Catholic sacrificial liturgy demands that, at least absent unusual circumstances, its ministerial functions be executed by Catholics. By the same token, it would simply be wrong to replace the readers with a recording, or the altar servers with convincing robots. At the same time, however, we must be cautious not to carry that too far by positing that Catholics have a magical ability to read scripture out loud in an observable way that non-Catholics are incapable of.
God has no need of anything; the Mass, like all the Sacraments and the very sacrifice of Christ, is really a gift that God has given us. (We can indeed show our gratitude for that gift, in part, by treating it carefully, as a prized possession.
Nobody is talking about magic but the power of faith is real and for example you can see that in the sacramentals. Things can and do happen because of true faith, I would not discount that. That is also why we should use Catholics in good standing and not just Catholics.
That is correct but the Mass is still for God and not for us. Msgr… Romano Guardini wrote an exhaustive argument about that in his short book “The Spirit of the Liturgy”.
With this line of thinking, “God would know the difference.” Perhaps God would be rejoicing. He loves all of His children. He wants all of His children to come to Him.
I think that this a very simplistic approach to the fundamentals of a liturgy. In General God wants everybody but he also wants specific behaviors, including for everybody to be member of the same universal Church.
What “specific behaviors”? Also, I would change that last word to begin with. Small “c”.
The specific behaviors include accepting the Truth in its fullness.You can call your church a church my Church is the Church because it was established by Jesus and it has the fullness of the Truth.
Christ’s message was pretty simple - love God above all things and love others as you love yourself. I can’t tell you how many children I’ve had who begged their parents to become Catholics and eventually did - good Catholics! Yes, members of the universal Church. They learned about the Catechism through the our lessons in school each day, we study scripture especially the week’s readings, attend weekly Mass, but when the children read at the Mass, there is a spark!!! It is difficult to explain and it may sound simplistic to you, but it is evangelization in a profound way! :extrahappy:
Catechetical studies for children and newcomers are on thing, liturgical studies and development are something quite different. Here I am not talking about catechetical instruction I am talking about liturgical settings. My reference of simplistic approach refers to the discussion of liturgical aspects and not catechetical instruction. I completely agree with you that catechetical instruction must begin in a simple manner.