Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => The Sacred: Catholic Liturgy, Chant, Prayers => Topic started by: SeanJohnson on April 15, 2022, 06:29:23 AM
-
This explanation of Dom Gueranger contains an historical error, but runs as follows:
“Here [at this prayer] the deacon does not invite the faithful to kneel. The Church has no hesitation in offering up a prayer for the descendants of Jesus’ executioners; but in doing so she refrains from genuflecting, because this mark of adoration was turned by the Jєωs into an insult against our Lord during the Passion. She prays for His scoffers; but she shrinks from repeating the act wherewith they scoffed at Him.” (The Liturgical Year, Vol. VI, p. 485).
Yet, as others have observed, it was the Romans (and not the Jєωs), who mocked our Lord with the genuflection. So Gueranger’s explanation does not hold, unless one wishes to interpret it as meaning the Jєωs were the remote (but direct) cause of Christ having been subjected to Roman mockery, and the genuflections.
A more persuasive explanation seems, therefore, to be this one:
“Here the flectamus genua is omitted , to remind us that on this day Christ was outraged by the Jєωs with blows, as they shouted ‘prophetiza nobis." (See p.28)
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/01715a_5eb3d5421a714bfa8f60375184df9b5a.pdf (https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/01715a_5eb3d5421a714bfa8f60375184df9b5a.pdf)
-
Yet, as others have observed, it was the Romans (and not the Jєωs), who mocked our Lord with the genuflection.
It seems to me that +Gueranger must be pulling in facts from sources outside of Scripture (ie Tradition/Church Fathers) for his claim. How do we know that the Jews didn’t genuflect when Our Lord was being interrogated by Annas/Chiaphus? How do we know that the Jews didn’t mock Our Lord by genuflections when He was on the cross? They certainly mocked His Divinity as He hung there.
Scripture is not very detailed on all of Christ's passion. The Jєωιѕн genuflection mockery may be proved from other sources. I think +Gueranger deserves the benefit of the doubt here…
-
You can bet that the Jews were in on it too. While the Gospel mentions the Romans, that doesn't mean that the Jews weren't doing the same thing also.
We don't genuflect because the Jews refused to accept and bend the knee to their King.
Instead of accepting Our Lord as King, they cursed themselves by saying "we have no king but Caesar."
I like the part where Pilate refuses to change the inscription and let it as "King of the Jews".
-
At my 1962-Rite Independent chapel, I did not bend the knee when it came time to pray for the Jєωs ... was the only guy in the entire church standing. I prayed for them sincerely to convert, but the Jєωs are attempting to get the entire world to bend the knee to them, and I refuse therefore to bend the knee for them in prayer.
-
At my 1962-Rite Independent chapel, I did not bend the knee when it came time to pray for the Jєωs ... was the only guy in the entire church standing. I prayed for them sincerely to convert, but the Jєωs are attempting to get the entire world to bend the knee to them, and I refuse therefore to bend the knee for them in prayer.
I did the same. Oh for the pre1955 liturgies.:pray:
-
At my 1962-Rite Independent chapel, I did not bend the knee when it came time to pray for the Jєωs ... was the only guy in the entire church standing. I prayed for them sincerely to convert, but the Jєωs are attempting to get the entire world to bend the knee to them, and I refuse therefore to bend the knee for them in prayer.
Indeed. There is also, in the pre-1955 Holy Week, the 12th reading on Holy Saturday that tells the story of Nabuchodonosor and his idol, and he commanded the three young men to bow to his idol and they refused. The Church omits the genuflection after that reading too, because of the mention of the idolatrous genuflection in the reading.
So is this insulting to idolators that we don't genuflect there either, and should we genuflect there so as not to offend idolators?
-
This explanation of Dom Gueranger contains an historical error, but runs as follows:
Whoa, wait a second there, buddy. I'm not sure we should go around casually accusing Gueranger of error, especially when we're talking about what is written in the gospel. Gueranger could read the gospel just as well as you can, and if that's what he said, then he's the one who is correct here.
-
Whoa, wait a second there, buddy. I'm not sure we should go around casually accusing Gueranger of error, especially when we're talking about what is written in the gospel. Gueranger could read the gospel just as well as you can, and if that's what he said, then he's the one who is correct here.
Sorry to scandalize you, but Gueranger’s error is widely acknowledged (unless you take the wider interpretation I suggested):
It was the Romans who mocked our Lord with genuflection, and any argument to the contrary would be conjecture not supported by revelation.
-
Sorry to scandalize you, but Gueranger’s error is widely acknowledged (unless you take the wider interpretation I suggested):
It was the Romans who mocked our Lord with genuflection, and any argument to the contrary would be conjecture not supported by revelation.
Everyone before has explained it to you and you obviously reject their commonsense response, so I will not go there. Just to ask:
Why do you bring this subject up? The Church forbade us to genuflect for the Jєωs for who knows how many centuries, do you have a better explanation than Guerranger why we do not genuflect? Or are you calling the no genuflection an error and saying we should all genuflect?
-
It was the Romans who mocked our Lord with genuflection, and any argument to the contrary would be conjecture not supported by revelation.
So you limit "Revelation" to Scripture alone? Have you studied what the Church Fathers may have said about the matter?
[Your post above implies Sola Scriptura. Perhaps you should withhold judgment that Dom Gueranger was in error until you've studied the Patristic sources.]
As others have pointed out, Dom Gueranger was a scholar and he knew more about Scripture AND Tradition than most of us posting on this thread combined. He very likely had in mind various commentaries from the Fathers on this matter, with which he was very well acquainted.
-
Here's from the famous Scripture Commentary by Cornelius a Lapide:
Ver. 29. And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon His head. This was done both for insult and for torture. It was done, too, by Jєωιѕн insolence, and not by Pilate’s order, though he permitted it (see above on ver. 25).
There would appear to be some Tradition that the Jews orchestrated this incident.
-
St. Jerome rightly points out that the reason this was done was due to the charge brought against him by the Jєωs, that He was the King of the Jєωs. So the Jєωs are responsible for the incident.
He had been styled King of the Jєωs, and the Scribes and Priests had brought this charge against Him, that He claimed sovereignty over the Jєωιѕн nation; hence this mockery of the soldiers, taking away His own garments, they put on Him a scarlet cloak to represent that purple fringe which kings of old used to wear, for the diadem they put on Him a crown of thorns, and for the regal sceptre give Him a reed, and perform adoration to Him as to a king.
When Pilate attached the "King of the Jєωs" to the crucifix, that was due to the Roman legal requirement to list the charges, the reason for which a man was being crucified on the cross. Those were the charges brought by the Jєωs, and the charges were undoubtedly handed over the Roman who were given orders to scourge Our Lord. So what happened is that they saw the charges and proceeded to perform this mockery of Him as a direct result of the "Jєωιѕн insolence" as Cornelius a Lapide described it.
-
Everyone before has explained it to you and you obviously reject their commonsense response, so I will not go there. Just to ask:
Why do you bring this subject up? The Church forbade us to genuflect for the Jєωs for who knows how many centuries, do you have a better explanation than Guerranger why we do not genuflect? Or are you calling the no genuflection an error and saying we should all genuflect?
So sorry, but "everyone before" me has emotionalized their response, without a single citation to rebut my citation.
I already explained -before you started crying- the reason we do not genuflect for the Jews.
-
So you limit "Revelation" to Scripture alone? Have you studied what the Church Fathers may have said about the matter?
[Your post above implies Sola Scriptura. Perhaps you should withhold judgment that Dom Gueranger was in error until you've studied the Patristic sources.]
As others have pointed out, Dom Gueranger was a scholar and he knew more about Scripture AND Tradition than most of us posting on this thread combined. He very likely had in mind various commentaries from the Fathers on this matter, with which he was very well acquainted.
What stupidity.
Please rebut the citation I included, and save me your emotional conjecture.
-
Here's from the famous Scripture Commentary by Cornelius a Lapide:
There would appear to be some Tradition that the Jєωs orchestrated this incident.
A less emotional response would acknowledge that I already pointed to that in my OP.
-
St. Jerome rightly points out that the reason this was done was due to the charge brought against him by the Jєωs, that He was the King of the Jєωs. So the Jєωs are responsible for the incident.
When Pilate attached the "King of the Jєωs" to the crucifix, that was due to the Roman legal requirement to list the charges, the reason for which a man was being crucified on the cross. Those were the charges brought by the Jєωs, and the charges were undoubtedly handed over the Roman who were given orders to scourge Our Lord. So what happened is that they saw the charges and proceeded to perform this mockery of Him as a direct result of the "Jєωιѕн insolence" as Cornelius a Lapide described it.
Once again, the incomprehending emotionalism missses the fact that I have already allowed for this in the OP.
-
So sorry, but "everyone before" me has emotionalized their response, without a single citation to rebut my citation.
I already explained -before you started crying- the reason we do not genuflect for the Jєωs.
Who's crying? I am flattered that you talk to me as if I were a contemporary of yours, but in reality I could be your father, so just answer me as you would your father and I'll have the same respect for you. I asked you simple questions. Be so kind as to answer them.
Why do you bring this subject up? The Church forbade us to genuflect for the Jєωs for who knows how many centuries, do you have a better explanation than Guerranger why we do not genuflect? Or are you calling the no genuflection an error and saying we should all genuflect?
-
Who's crying? I am flattered that you talk to me as if I were a contemporary of yours, but in reality I could be your father, so just answer me as you would your father and I'll have the same respect for you. I asked you simple questions. Be so kind as to answer them.
Dad-
I already explained to you the reason we don't genuflect for the Jews.
What more do you want? If you think to refute me, please provide your citations. If you don't have any (and you don't), what does that indicate to you?
-
Dad-
I already explained to you the reason we don't genuflect for the Jєωs. What more do you want?
Dear Son,
I don't see it anywhere, please quote it for me to see.
-
I don't see it anywhere, please quote it for me to see.
“Here the flectamus genua is omitted, to remind us that on this day Christ was outraged by the Jєωs with blows, as they shouted ‘prophetiza nobis." (See p.28)
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/01715a_5eb3d5421a714bfa8f60375184df9b5a.pdf (https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/01715a_5eb3d5421a714bfa8f60375184df9b5a.pdf)
-
“Here the flectamus genua is omitted, to remind us that on this day Christ was outraged by the Jєωs with blows, as they shouted ‘prophetiza nobis." (See p.28)
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/01715a_5eb3d5421a714bfa8f60375184df9b5a.pdf (https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/01715a_5eb3d5421a714bfa8f60375184df9b5a.pdf)
Ok, now I see, and likely others see it for the first time too. No big deal, the author of your bulletin says his personal opinion of why we do not genuflect. It does not say who he is though. We know Abbot Guerranger and his take on it. No big deal. I believe both. The important point is that we do not genuflect because we never have before Bugnini.
Maybe we should mark Liturgical time before Bugnini and after Bugnini, BB and AB?
-
We debated this one last year and there was disagreement on who actually did the mock genuflections.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WXtI-zXUuds/TgZ2pkdq4BI/AAAAAAAAEjw/oBrG5C2xWkE/s400/Jesus_is_Mocked.jpg)
I believe the mystics are the best guides on this.
The Roman soldiers participated in the verbal mockery. It was a large number of them, but they remained in formation.
They did not directly engage in the crowning, as Mel Gibson depicted.
If you double-check, the mystics claim that Our Lord was directly abused by slaves. Around 50 participated.
The same applied to the scouring. It wasn't Roman soldiers who did it, but slaves. 6 men, in teams of (2), who rotated in the scourging.
So, who paid the slaves? Obviously, they were encouraged by the Jєωs to do their worst.
Anne Catherine Emmerich has the best account of this.
But there are (3) mystics who's Passion visions overlap and coincide. (Emmerich, St. Brigid of Sweden, Therese Neumann of Germany).
-
Note: It's always convenient for the jews to claim, someone else did it.
In the 1953 movie "The Robe", jew Hollywood, wrote themselves out of the Passion.
It was the Romans who did it all, because Our Lord was a dangerous ιnѕυrrєcтισnist.
The Crucifixion: "Oh, the Romans did it!"
Covid-19: "Oh, the Chinese did it!"
-
Obviously, they were encouraged by the Jєωs to do their worst.
From my OP:
"So Gueranger’s explanation does not hold, unless one wishes to interpret it as meaning the Jєωs were the remote (but direct) cause of Christ having been subjected to Roman mockery, and the genuflections."
-
Once again, the incomprehending emotionalism missses the fact that I have already allowed for this in the OP.
Evidently Lent has not changed you much. Some of us were defending your rash imputation of error to Dom Gueranger. You also articulated a Sola Scriptura position in a later post.
-
What stupidity.
Please rebut the citation I included, and save me your emotional conjecture.
Maybe one year you’ll grow up a little bit as a result of Lent.
-
Roman soldiers did not crown our Lord with thorns.
Per Anne Catherine Emmerich (http://annecatherineemmerich.com/complete_visions/volume_11_the_bitter_passion_of_our_lord_jesus_christ/the-bitter-passion-of-our-lord-jesus-christ-part-8/)
The bitter Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ – Part 8
(http://annecatherineemmerich.com/complete_visions/volume_11_the_bitter_passion_of_our_lord_jesus_christ/the-bitter-passion-of-our-lord-jesus-christ-part-8/)
CHAPTER XXVI.
The Crowning with Thorns.
No sooner did Sister Emmerich recommence the narrative of her visions on the Passion
than she again became extremely ill, oppressed with fever, and so tormented by violent
thirst that her tongue was perfectly parched and contracted; and on the Monday after Mid-
Lent Sunday, she was so exhausted that it was not without great difficulty, and after many
intervals of rest, that she narrated all which our Lord suffered in this crowning with thorns.
She was scarcely able to speak, because she herself felt every sensation which she described
in the following account:
Pilate harangued the populace many times during the time of the scourging of Jesus, but
they interrupted him once, and vociferated, ‘He shall be executed, even if we die for it.’
When Jesus was led into the guardhouse, they all cried out again, ‘Crucify him, crucify
him!’
After this there was silence for a time. Pilate occupied himself in giving different orders to
the soldiers, and the servants of the High Priests brought them some refreshments; after
which Pilate, whose superstitious tendencies made him uneasy in mind, went into the inner
part of his palace in order to consult his gods, and to offer them incense.
When the Blessed Virgin and the holy women had gathered up the blood of Jesus, with
which the pillar and the adjacent parts were saturated, they left the forum and went into a
neighbouring small house, the owner of which I do not know. John was not, I think, present
at the scourging of Jesus.
A gallery encircled the inner court of the guardhouse where our Lord was crowned with
thorns, and the doors were open. The cowardly ruffians, who were eagerly waiting to gratify
their cruelty by torturing and insulting our Lord, were about fifty in number, and the
greatest part slaves or servants of the jailers and soldiers.
The mob gathered round the building, but were soon displaced by a thousand Roman soldiers, who were drawn up in
good order and stationed there. Although forbidden to leave their ranks, these soldiers
nevertheless did their utmost by laughter and applause to incite the cruel executioners to
redouble their insults; and as public applause gives fresh energy to a comedian, so did their
words of encouragement increase tenfold the cruelty of these men.
In the middle of the court there stood the fragment of a pillar, and on it was placed a very
low stool which these cruel men maliciously covered with sharp flints and bits of broken
potsherds.
Then they tore off the garments of Jesus, thereby reopening all his wounds; threw
over his shoulders an old scarlet mantle which barely reached his knees; dragged him to the
seat prepared, and pushed him roughly down upon it, having first placed the crown of
thorns upon his head.
The crown of thorns was made of three branches plaited together, the
greatest part of the thorns being purposely turned inwards so as to pierce our Lord’s head.
Having first placed these twisted branches on his forehead, they tied them tightly together at
the back of his head, and no sooner was this accomplished to their satisfaction than they put
a large reed into his hand, doing all with derisive gravity as if they were really crowning him
king. They then seized the reed, and struck his head so violently that his eyes were filled
with blood; they knelt before him, derided him, spat in his face, and buffeted him, saying at
the same time, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ Then they threw down his stool, pulled him up again
from the ground on which he had fallen, and re-seated him with the greatest possible
brutality.
It is quite impossible to describe the cruel outrages which were thought of and
perpetrated by these monsters under human form. The sufferings of Jesus from thirst,
caused by the fever which his wounds and sufferings had brought on, were intense.7 He
trembled all over, his flesh was torn piecemeal, his tongue contracted, and the only
refreshment he received was the blood which trickled from his head on to his parched lips.
This shameful scene was protracted a full half-hour, and the Roman soldiers continued
during the whole time to applaud and encourage the perpetration of still greater outrages.
-
A less emotional response would acknowledge that I already pointed to that in my OP.
Sure, Sean, citing Cornelius a Lapide and St. Jerome is “emotionalism”.
It was done with little comment and the only emotionalism here is coming from you ... a classic example of projection.
-
So sorry, but "everyone before" me has emotionalized their response, without a single citation to rebut my citation.
Um, ... I cited Gueranger. I consider him a solid authority.
-
Roman soldiers did not scourge Our Lord at the Pillar.
Per Anne Catherine Emmerich (http://annecatherineemmerich.com/complete_visions/volume_11_the_bitter_passion_of_our_lord_jesus_christ/the-bitter-passion-of-our-lord-jesus-christ-part-7/)
CHAPTER XXII.
The Scourging of Jesus.
That most weak and undecided of all judges, Pilate, had several times repeated these
dastardly words: ‘I find no crime in him: I will chastise him, therefore, and let him go;’ to which the
Jews had continued to respond, ‘Crucify him! Crucify him!’ but he determined to adhere to his
resolution of not condemning our Lord to death, and ordered him to be scourged according
to the manner of the Romans. The guards were therefore ordered to conduct him through
the midst of the furious multitude to the forum, which they did with the utmost brutality, at
the same time loading him with abuse, and striking him with their staffs. The pillar where
criminals were scourged stood to the north of Pilate’s palace, near the guard-house, and the
executioners soon arrived, carrying whips, rods, and ropes, which they tossed down at its
base. They were six in number, dark, swarthy men, somewhat shorter than Jesus; their
chests were covered with a piece of leather, or with some dirty stuff; their loins were girded,
and their hairy, sinewy arms bare. They were malefactors from the frontiers of Egypt, who
had been condemned for their crimes to hard labour, and were employed principally in
making canals, and in erecting public buildings, the most criminal being selected to act as
executioners in the Praetorium.
These cruel men had many times scourged poor criminals to death at this pillar. They
resembled wild beasts or demons, and appeared to be half drunk. They struck our Lord with
their fists, and dragged him by the cords with which he was pinioned, although he followed
them without offering the least resistance, and, finally, they barbarously knocked him down
against the pillar.
This pillar, placed in the centre of the court, stood alone, and did not serve
to sustain any part of the building; it was not very high, for a tall man could touch the
summit by stretching out his arm; there was a large iron ring at the top, and both rings and
hooks a little lower down. It is quite impossible to describe the cruelty shown by these
ruffians towards Jesus: they tore off the mantle with which he had been clothed in derision
at the court of Herod, and almost threw prostrate again.
Jesus trembled and shuddered as he stood before the pillar, and took off his garments as
quickly as he could, but his hands were bloody and swollen. The only return he made when
his brutal executioners struck and abused him was, to pray for them in the most touching
manner: he turned his face once towards his Mother, who was standing overcome with
grief; this look quite unnerved her: she fainted, and would have fallen, had not the holy
women who were there supported her. Jesus put his arms round the pillar, and when his
hands were thus raised, the archers fastened them to the iron ring which was at the top of
the pillar; they then dragged his arms to such a height that his feet, which were tightly
bound to the base of the pillar, scarcely touched the ground. Thus was the Holy of Holies
violently stretched, without a particle of clothing, on a pillar used for the punishment of the
greatest criminals; and then did two furious ruffians who were thirsting for his blood begin
in the most barbarous manner to scourge his sacred body from head to foot. The whips or
scourges which they first made use of appeared to me to be made of a species of flexible
white wood, but perhaps they were composed of the sinews of the ox, or of strips of leather.
Our loving Lord, the Son of God, true God and true Man, writhed as a worm under the
blows of these barbarians; his mild but deep groans might be heard from afar; they
resounded through the air, forming a kind of touching accompaniment to the hissing of the
instruments of torture. These groans resembled rather a touching cry of prayer and
supplication, than moans of anguish.
The clamour of the Pharisees and the people formed
another species of accompaniment, which at times as a deafening thunder-storm deadened
and smothered these sacred and mournful cries, and in their place might be heard the
words, ‘Put him to death!’ ‘Crucify him!’ Pilate continued parleying with the people, and when
he demanded silence in order to be able to speak, he was obliged to proclaim his wishes to
the clamorous assembly by the sound of a trumpet, and at such moments you might again
hear the noise of the scourges, the moans of Jesus, the imprecations of the soldiers, and the
bleating of the Paschal lambs which were being washed in the Probatica pool, at no great
distance from the forum. There was something peculiarly touching in the plaintive bleating
of these lambs: they alone appeared to unite their lamentations with the suffering moans of
our Lord.
The Jєωιѕн mob was gathered together at some distance from the pillar at which the
dreadful punishment was taking place, and Roman soldiers were stationed in different parts
round about. Many persons were walking to and fro, some in silence, others speaking of
Jesus in the most insulting terms possible, and a few appearing touched, and I thought I
beheld rays of light issuing from our Lord and entering the hearts of the latter. I saw groups
of infamous, bold-looking young men, who were for the most part busying themselves near
the watch-house in preparing fresh scourges, while others went to seek branches of thorns.
Several of the servants of the High Priests went up to the brutal executioners and gave them
money; as also a large jug filled with a strong bright red liquid, which quite inebriated them,
and increased their cruelty tenfold towards their innocent Victim. The two ruffians
continued to strike our Lord with unremitting violence for a quarter of an hour, and were
then succeeded by two others.
His body was entirely covered with black, blue, and red
marks; the blood was trickling down on the ground, and yet the furious cries which issued
from among the assembled Jews showed that their cruelty was far from being satiated.
The night had been extremely cold, and the morning was dark and cloudy; a little hail
had fallen, which surprised everyone, but towards twelve o’clock the day became brighter,
and the sun shone forth.
The two fresh executioners commenced scourging Jesus with the greatest possible fury;
they made use of a different kind of rod,—a species of thorny stick, covered with knots and
splinters. The blows from these sticks tore his flesh to pieces; his blood spouted out so as to
stain their arms, and he groaned, prayed, and shuddered. At this moment, some strangers
mounted on camels passed through the forum; they stopped for a moment, and were quite
overcome with pity and horror at the scene before them, upon which some of the bystanders
explained the cause of what they witnessed. Some of these travellers had been baptised by
John, and others had heard the sermon of Jesus on the mountain. The noise and the tumult
of the mob was even more deafening near the house of Pilate.
Two fresh executioners took the places of the last mentioned, who were beginning to
flag; their scourges were composed of small chains, or straps covered with iron hooks,
which penetrated to the bone, and tore off large pieces of flesh at every blow. What word,
alas! could describe this terrible—this heartrending scene!
The cruelty of these barbarians was nevertheless not yet satiated; they untied Jesus, and
again fastened him up with his back turned towards the pillar. As he was totally unable to
support himself in an upright position, they passed cords round his waist, under his arms,
and above his knees, and having bound his hands tightly into the rings which were placed at
the upper part of the pillar, they recommenced scourging him with even greater fury than
before; and one among them struck him constantly on the face with a new rod. The body of
our Lord was perfectly torn to shreds,—it was but one wound. He looked at his torturers
with his eyes filled with blood; as if entreating mercy; but their brutality appeared to
increase, and his moans each moment became more feeble.
The dreadful scourging had been continued without intermission for three quarters of an
hour, when a stranger of lowly birth, a relation to Ctesiphon, the blind man whom Jesus
had cured, rushed from amidst the crowd, and approached the pillar with a knife shaped
like a cutlass in his hand. ‘Cease!’ he exclaimed, in an indignant tone; ‘Cease! Scourge not
this innocent man unto death!’ The drunken miscreants, taken by surprise, stopped short,
while he quickly severed the cords which bound Jesus to the pillar, and disappeared among
the crowd. Jesus fell almost without consciousness on the ground, which was bathed with
his blood.
The executioners left him there, and rejoined their cruel companions, who were
amusing themselves in the guardhouse with drinking, and plaiting the crown of thorns.
Our Lord remained for a short time on the ground, at the foot of the pillar, bathed in his
own blood, and two or three bold-looking girls came up to gratify their curiosity away in
disgust, but at the moment the pain of the wounds of Jesus was so intense that he raised his
bleeding head and looked at them. They retired quickly, and the soldiers and guards
laughed and made game of them.
During the time of the scourging of our Lord, I saw weeping angels approach him many
times; I likewise heard the prayers he constantly addressed to his Father for the pardon of
our sins—prayers which never ceased during the whole time of the infliction of this cruel
punishment.
Whilst he lay bathed in his blood I saw an angel present to him a vase
containing a bright-looking beverage which appeared to reinvigorate him in a certain
degree. The archers soon returned, and after giving him some blows with their sticks, bade
him rise and follow them. He raised himself with the greatest difficulty, as his trembling
limbs could scarcely support the weight of this body; they did not give him sufficient time to
put on his clothes, but threw his upper garment over his naked shoulders and led him from
the pillar to the guardhouse, where he wiped the blood which trickled down his face with a
corner of his garment. When he passed before the benches on which the High Priests were
seated, they cried out, ‘Put him to death! Crucify him! Crucify him!’ and then turned away
disdainfully.
The executioners led him into the interior of the guardhouse, which was filled
with slaves, archers, hodmen, and the very dregs of the people, but there were no soldiers.
The great excitement among the populace alarmed Pilate so much, that he sent to the
fortress of Antonia for a reinforcement of Roman soldiers, and posed these well-disciplined
troops round the guard-house; they were permitted to talk and to deride Jesus in every
possible way, but were forbidden to quit their ranks. These soldiers, whom Pilate had sent
for to intimidate the mob, numbered about a thousand.
-
Evidently Lent has not changed you much. Some of us were defending your rash imputation of error to Dom Gueranger. You also articulated a Sola Scriptura position in a later post.
Loudestmouth-
Thanks for the gratuitous assertions; keep pounding them out, brother!
Remember: If you spew enough vomit, someone might find it delicious.
But heaven forbid you should provide a citation to back your hallucinations!
-
Maybe one year you’ll grow up a little bit as a result of Lent.
I do not hold out the same hope for you.
-
Sure, Sean, citing Cornelius a Lapide and St. Jerome is “emotionalism”.
It was done with little comment and the only emotionalism here is coming from you ... a classic example of projection.
Except that you’re too emotional to admit that you never made it all the way through the OP to recognize that you only supplied ammo to back my OP (ie., In this regard LT is your better, whereas you need to keep flailing until you can find a way to save face).
Some things never change.
-
Um, ... I cited Gueranger. I consider him a solid authority.
Eh, I cited Gueranger in my OP, which makes me wonder what you are emoting about.
-
At my 1962-Rite Independent chapel, I did not bend the knee when it came time to pray for the Jєωs ... was the only guy in the entire church standing. I prayed for them sincerely to convert, but the Jєωs are attempting to get the entire world to bend the knee to them, and I refuse therefore to bend the knee for them in prayer.
I went to the SSPV chapel for Good Friday as I tend to do annually for Holy Week. The liturgy was a proper, pre-1955 Mass of the Presanctified with no genuflection for the Red Sea pedestrians...and no Collect for Bergoglio. 😀👍
-
Indeed. There is also, in the pre-1955 Holy Week, the 12th reading on Holy Saturday that tells the story of Nabuchodonosor and his idol, and he commanded the three young men to bow to his idol and they refused. The Church omits the genuflection after that reading too, because of the mention of the idolatrous genuflection in the reading.
So is this insulting to idolators that we don't genuflect there either, and should we genuflect there so as not to offend idolators?
I did not know this. If this is the case, why do the pre-1955 Good Friday prayers include a genuflection for pagans [which includes the Romans]?
-
I went to the SSPV chapel for Good Friday as I tend to do annually for Holy Week. The liturgy was a proper, pre-1955 Mass of the Presanctified with no genuflection for the Red Sea pedestrians...and no Collect for Bergoglio. 😀👍
I do wish they would at least consider moving the times, do the Good Friday Liturgy between noon and 3PM, and then Holy Saturday at night. In other respects, the SSPV do accept a number of the Pope Pius XII changes in that regard, so for instance the 3-hour fast before Holy Communion (vs. from midnight) and the ability to offer Masses in the evenings, which they'll occasionally do. Not ALL of the changes in the 1955 rite were entirely inappropriate or illegitimate. Unfortunately, Bugnini and company used those to sneak in the other Modernist stuff. One could also argue for shortening the Holy Saturday Vigil (maybe pare down some of the lessons). There was an issue with the Easter Vigil being poorly attended before V2, due to the length. My elderly (and rather frail) mother only went to the last part of it because she couldn't deal with the 4.5 hours. And if you have younger children, etc., it's almost an impossibility. Again, there were two reasons they originally had all those lessons. 1) it was considered a final instruction for the Catechumens who were to be baptized that evening and 2) the Vigil went on overnight for many hours, so in that case, why not?
Yes, as others have pointed out, the notion of light and dark do have a mystical significance, and yet at the same time the ceremonies were clearly designed to take place overnight. I would like to see it restored to taking place overnight, where perhaps you would do the first part before midnight, culminating in the Baptism of the Catechumens at around midnight, have the lessons spaced out throughout the night (for those able to stay), followed by the first Easter Mass at Dawn (or first light). Then the other Easter Masses later. That would be an amazing experience, and the one which was common in early Church.