Posted on 06/15/2019 3:52:12 PM PDT by ebb tide
Ping
I converted to Catholicism, because study convinced me that it, and only it, was the truest, deepest Christianity. Latin and chant had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Very proud of these young people who stand with Jesus’ Church in true faith.
Crud....one kid below average!!! Oh well...got started late in life so I have to be happy with my "small" family. :D
I'm not surprised with you being in support of Holy Communion in the Paw and Extraordinary Eucharistic Monsters.
You're certainly not alone--the way of study into the Catholic Church is the way for plenty of folks.
However, there are also plenty of us who studied the faith (whether as cradle Catholics or converts) and found what passes as the "average" expression of the Ordinary Form to be wanting. Worship that draws deeply on the Church's liturgical tradition (any or all of Latin, chant--both Gregorian and vernacular, reverent celebration by the priest, beautiful and worthy vestments, reverent behavior by those attending) shows that those present believe what they profess to be true--Lex orandi, lex credendi.
This is not to say that others in other parishes don't believe, but no small few of Millennial (mid-30s to early-20s) and Generation Z Catholics find authenticity particularly in the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite. It can also be found in reverent celebrations of the Ordinary Form.
As an older Millennial (sometimes called an "Xennial"), what's in this article and the one I just linked ring perfectly true for me. I am a cradle Catholic, but I am a faithful Catholic today because I found the Latin Mass as a college student and it deepened my understanding of how we pray and live the Faith.
I think rather than reporting this abuse, I'll just leave your comment here, so folks can get a glimmer of your true personality.
I grew up in heavily Catholic South Louisiana, had plenty of Catholic friends, attended "TLM" with them on a few occasions LONG before Vatican II, and found Latin a major distraction from following the service (and having the English on the opposite page helped not at all).
The only abuse I see is laypeople manhandling the Body of Christ as if they were passing out hors d’oeuvres.
I have never seen a "layperson" Eucharistic Minister behave with anything other than deep reverence when handling the consecrated host(s) or wine. The "manhandling" is a figment of your imagination.
And receiving "in the hand" is no less reverent than receiving "on the tongue". It's basically all skin contact. I seriously doubt God cares.....it is the reception that matters.
Does every eucharistic monster purify his hands before and after manhandling the Body of Christ?
Does every communicant who receives in the paw purify his paws at the altar after receiving Holy Communion?
If, “No”, to any of the above questions, the Body of Christ is being treated irreverently.
For your further edification:
Do you think God even cares about you "doubt"? Pope Francis doubts there are any souls in Hell, they merely vanish.
Ludicrous. The correct point at your link can be summarized as “fragmentation happens”. It happens whether only the priest and deacon handle the host, whether a paten is held or not, whether an Extraordinary Minister does the handling, or whether the host is received “in the hand” or “on the tongue”.
In ALL of those cases, fragments of the host will ALWAYS be shed and lost, as an inevitable fact of physics. No amount of “purification” after distribution will alter that.
This basically boils down to the same logic of “how many angels can dance on the head of pin”.
In the TLM, once the Body and Blood of Christ are consecrated, the priest never separates his thumb and forefinger until after Holy Communion has been distributed. This is so that no particle of Christ be "lost".
After Holy Communion has been given to ever communicant on the tongue only, the priest then purifies each communion paten over the chalice. Finally the priest's thumbs and forefingers, the only "skin" to have touched the Body of Christ are purified over the same chalice. Finally the priest drinks all the remnants of Body and Blood of Christ from the chalice.
So your claim that, "In ALL of those cases, fragments of the host will ALWAYS be shed and lost, as an inevitable fact of physics. No amount of “purification” after distribution will alter that", shows the absolute abuse Christ suffers in the New Mass as you have admitted.
Have you no reverence for the Body and Blood of Christ in that you are willing accept that His Remnants will be "lost"?
Disgusting.
oh, please. We’re talking about regular Eucharistic usage in parishes...not “World Youth Day”. In a world of X billions of people, I’m one can find photographs of almost anything humanly possible.
Abuse is abuse, no matter where it occurs.
Go ahead and find photographs of Eucharistic abuse at a TLM.
P.S. WYD masses are celebrated by popes. They set great examples for eucharistic monsters.
I’m done. Just tired of the intellectual dishonesty in your mode of debate. You’re obviously a fanatic grinding an ax who is incapable of rational, honest debate. Bye!
Did you ever wonder why the angel at Fatima gave Holy Communion to Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco on the tongue only?
Cardinal Sarah: Communion in the hand part of ‘diabolical attack’ on Eucharist
The True Story of Communion in the Hand Revealed
“Whatever You Can Do to Stop Communion in the Hand Will be Blessed by God” ~ Fr. John Hardon S.J.
And you seem to be fine with that:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.