Why Some Conservative Catholics Want To Stop

[Selah]

Okay. I just didn't understand. Now I do. Thanks.

[Apotheoun]

The fact that the modern Roman Rite has broken from many universally accepted traditions (i.e., traditions that are affirmed by all the different liturgical rites) is lamentable to say the least, and it should be no surprise that the poor state of the liturgy in the Western Church has a detrimental impact on ecumenical relations with the Orthodox Churches.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 August 2009 - 06:41 PM' timestamp='1250808065' post='1953414']
What I take offense at, in both your post and his, is the assumption that restricting the direct handling of the Eucharistic elements to the clergy is based upon an irrational fear that the holy mysteries might be profaned. In other words, the example of a priest who is suffering from a neurosis is irrelevant to the present discussion.
[/quote]

I made no such point.

I never said that restricting the handling of the host to the Priest was somehow neurotic in itself. My one and only point was that, while I understand why Catholics would want to protect their religious symbol from the appearance of desecration, sometimes (sometimes being the key word) it seems to move beyond a reasonable desire to protect the Host and into a neurosis amongst some Catholics. For example the Priest who went insane after developing a neurotic obsession over Host particles (an example which was quite relevant to my point).

If you want to morph that somewhat negligible observation into some widespread swipe at all Catholics who would rather receive on the tongue go ahead, but that was neither in the text of my post or my intended point.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Hassan

[Apotheoun]

Thank you for confirming my point that bringing up the neurosis of a particular priest is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Hassan' date='20 August 2009 - 04:56 PM' timestamp='1250808997' post='1953431']
I made no such point.

I never said that restricting the handling of the host to the Priest was somehow neurotic in itself. My one and only point was that, while I understand why Catholics would want to protect their religious symbol from the appearance of desecration, sometimes (sometimes being the key word) it seems to move beyond a reasonable desire to protect the Host and into a neurosis amongst [b]some Catholics[/b]. For example the Priest who went insane after developing a neurotic obsession over Host particles (an example which was quite relevant to my point).

If you want to morph that somewhat negligible observation into some widespread swipe at all Catholics who would rather receive on the tongue go ahead, but that was neither in the text of my post or my intended point.
[/quote]
Some Catholics? How many exactly? Who are they? A generalization is not a proof, nor is one story about a priest -- supposedly driven mad by the Church's liturgical rubrics -- a proof.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 August 2009 - 06:58 PM' timestamp='1250809139' post='1953433']
Thank you for confirming my point that bringing up the neurosis of a particular priest is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
[/quote]


I don't think you are a stupid man, so I find it hard to believe you are really just continually unable to grasp the point of my posts here or how it might be relevant to the topic of means of receiving communion.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Hassan' date='20 August 2009 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1250809607' post='1953439']
I don't think you are a stupid man, so I find it hard to believe you are really just continually unable to grasp the point of my posts here or how it might be relevant to the topic of means of receiving communion.
[/quote]
Your post about a neurotic priest is sad, for the priest (i.e., if he really exists), but it is utterly irrelevant as far as communion in the hand is concerned.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Brigid' date='20 August 2009 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1250806725' post='1953392']
It's possible to be cautious without being neurotic.
[/quote]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Hassan' date='20 August 2009 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1250809607' post='1953439']
I don't think you are a stupid man . . .
[/quote]
Thank you. By the way, I do not believe that you are stupid either; instead, I see you as simply uninformed about issues related to liturgical theology.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Hassan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 August 2009 - 07:02 PM' timestamp='1250809364' post='1953436']
Some Catholics? How many exactly? Who are they? A generalization is not a proof, nor is one story about a priest -- supposedly driven mad by the Church's liturgical rubrics -- a proof.
[/quote]

What proof? I'm not sure what you think I am trying to prove.

And what generalization? Saying "some x" is quite definitely not a generalization, and seeing as I have made absolutely no universal claims about Catholics on this thread I'm not sure what supposed generalization you are talking about.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Hassan

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Hassan' date='20 August 2009 - 06:06 PM' timestamp='1250809607' post='1953439']
I don't think you are a stupid man, so I find it hard to believe you are really just continually unable to grasp the point of my posts here or how it might be relevant to the topic of means of receiving communion.
[/quote]

Hassan, it is quite true that there are some Catholics who live with such an irrational fear. Obviously (and I realize that you admitted this) this, much like scrupulosity, is due to psychological problems rather than to Catholic doctrine.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Hassan' date='20 August 2009 - 05:12 PM' timestamp='1250809960' post='1953445']
What proof? I'm not sure what you think I am trying to prove.

And what generalization? Saying "some x" is quite definitely not a generalization, and seeing as I have made absolutely no universal claims about Catholics on this thread I'm not sure what supposed generalization you are talking about.
[/quote]
Saying some Catholics are neurotic because of the Church's liturgical rubrics is unproven and unprovable. It is a generalization about a non-existent group of "some" Catholics, a group that exists only in your mind.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='20 August 2009 - 07:15 PM' timestamp='1250810122' post='1953446']
Hassan, it is quite true that there are some Catholics who live with such an irrational fear. Obviously (and I realize that you admitted this) this, much like scrupulosity, is due to psychological problems rather than to Catholic doctrine.
[/quote]

I don't know where people are getting the idea that my point was every about Church doctrine. Of course such neurotic behavior and fear is due to individual psychology.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 August 2009 - 07:15 PM' timestamp='1250810141' post='1953447']
Saying some Catholics are neurotic because of the Church's liturgical rubrics is unproven and unprovable.[/QUOTE]

I never said that the liturgical rubric had any sort of causal role, nor did I imply it. In fact I think Selah pointed this out about a page ago.


[QUOTE] It is a generalization about a non-existent group of "some" Catholics, a group that exists only in your mind.
[/quote]

I'm making up the story about the Priest?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Hassan' date='20 August 2009 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1250810325' post='1953450']
I don't know where people are getting the idea that my point was every about Church doctrine. Of course such neurotic behavior and fear is due to individual psychology.
[/quote]
Yes, psychological disorders are experienced uniquely by an individual, which is why I saw your original post as utterly irrelevant to the present discussion.

Should the pope have defended and restored the tradition of the Church, a tradition that exists in all liturgical families? Yes, he should have, and in fact that is one of the primary duties of a bishop.