Sometimes it is right to judge

[CWBetts]

Actually, reverence is not an entirely interior disposition. Real reverence expresses itself in outward behavior. A person who has the use of his reason who (for example) sits at Mass yakking and laughing and carrying on is manifestly irreverent, and it is perfectly reasonable for those around him to conclude that he lacks reverence.

Which is not a problem with the form of the Mass, but with the worshiper. Radical Traditionalists seem to leave their logic locked up in a box, and never use it when discussing the Mass. You run on nothing but pure emotion.

 

[Victorious]

Radical Traditionalists seem to leave their logic locked up in a box, and never use it when discussing the Mass. You run on nothing but pure emotion.

Thank you for this deep insight into my character.

 

[CWBetts]

Thank you for this deep insight into my character.

I call em as I see em. No real arguments have been given as far as why the TLM is superior. We are just supposed to take your opinion over that of the Church.

 

[Victorious]

I call em as I see em. No real arguments have been given as far as why the TLM is superior. We are just supposed to take your opinion over that of the Church.

What an expert practitioner of rash judgment. Don’t bother to respond: you’re on my ignore list from here on out.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Before you judge CITH receivers, try walking in their shoes. For four weeks, take CITH, preferably from a lay woman.

It isn’t evil. It is not against Church rules. I would not challenge you to do anything I believe to be evil. Nor would I double dog dare you to do something I believed is evil.

Alan

I could never do that. What would be the purpose? Only the hands of the ordained should ever touch the Sacred Host.

“Because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.” - ST. THOMAS AQUINAS, Summa Theologica

 

[paramedicgirl]

If you believe that Mass according to the 1962 is “superior” to Mass according to the current missal, then shouldn’t you believe that the effects of the one be superior to the other? Many others here have stated such an opinion, saying that the latin Mass is more “efficacious” than the current Mass. If that is true, is the consecrated host of a latin Mass “superior” to that of the current Mass?

Latin should be capitalized.

The “effects” of the Latin Mass are superior in that they uphold all that is sacred; they inspire one to worship; the beauty and sacredness come through in the reverent silence and meaningful gestures of the priest. He makes the sign of the cross 52 times! Every gesture has a sacred meaning, and that alone inspires awe and reverence.

The prayers of the Latin Mass are so holy and humbling - take for example this prayer, said right before the priest reads the Gospel:

“Cleanse my heart and my lips O almighty God, who didst cleanse the lips of the prophet Isaias with a burning coal, and vouchsafe, through Thy gracious mercy, so to purify me, that I may worthily announce Thy holy Gospel”

And the prayer for grace, said right before the priest receives Communion:

Let not the partaking of Thy Body, O Lord Jesus Christ, which I, though unworthy, presume to receive, turn to my judgement and condemnation; but let it, through Thy mercy, become a safeguard and remedy, both for soul and body; Who with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, livest and reignest God, forever and ever. Amen.

As for the consecrations, they are equal, because both are the Body and Blood of Jesus.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I could never do that. What would be the purpose? Only the hands of the ordained should ever touch the Sacred Host.

I retracted this suggestion later in the thread. The purpose was supposed to be for COTT people to “walk in the shoes” of CITH people before judging them. It was a bad idea, and floresco and I have covered that thoroughly.

Alan

 

[Ockham]

Radical Traditionalists.

Now that’s just plain funny. Radical Traditional. Definition of radical:* thoroughgoing or extreme, esp. as regards change from accepted or traditional forms: a radical change in the policy of a company. *

I suppose you mean Extremist Traditional in an attempt to marginalize and discount. It’s a common ploy in the modern political arena.

If more people had voiced their views during the ‘spirit of V2’ reign there would probably be less for Traditional Catholics to complain about.