Arrogance & Hypocrisy of "Traditionalists"

[chevalier]

Well, I forgot to add something. I don’t really enjoy the modern practice of kissing for the sign of peace.

I don’t kiss males, ever, unless they are older relatives whom I don’t want to offend. Cheek only and there’s no exception here. I kiss females, but it’s for friends or relatives, and it’s still just the cheek with next to no exception.

I don’t want to kiss males at all. I feel less uncomfortable about kissing females, but I don’t want anyone to kiss me on the lips.

And you never know what the other person will try to do and where or how to kiss.

 

[TNT]

Teresita:

I wish! Since indult Masses over here are generally at weird times (3 pm on a Saturday is fairly normal), breakfast is not on the agenda.

I’ve never seen anyone say the Rosary at a TLM,**(In today’s TLM, the Faithful say the Rosary together, before Mass) ** interestingly: it was certainly common practice before the new Mass, but I suppose that those who now go to the TLM have a greater appreciation of it than before the changes, when it was largely taken for granted. The only person I know who says the Rosary during Mass is a lady in her 90s who hobbles a mile on crutches to hear every Mass said in the church - the NOM, that is. She goes to the TLM when there’s one in the vicinity, too. She’s now ill with terminal cancer, but still manages to get to Mass every time (apart from the 7.15 am ones, as it takes her too long to get herself up and dressed), and is one of the holiest people I know. I’m not knocking people who say the Rosary during Mass.

BTW, Nota Bene, why are you so irritated by the TLM and those who love it? Do you feel insecure about the NOM? I grant that rad-trads can be as irritating as neo-modernists, (not possible) and as inaccurate; but there seems to be more to your hostility than just that.

Sue

Great story, Sue.
I do not want the TLM as the norm for the herd.
Let the Remnant pay the price. The others can have what is free, convenient, and without effort or sacrifice.
Here is God’s way for all time, even today:

Leviticus 2:3 And the remnant of the sacrifice shall be Aaron’s, and his sons’, holy of holies of the offerings of the Lord.
4 Kings 19:31 For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and that which shall be saved out of mount Sion: the zeal of the Lord of hosts shall do this.
1 Esdras 9:8 And now as a little, and for a moment has our prayer been made before the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant, and give us a pin in his holy place, and that our God would enlighten our eyes, and would give us a little life in our bondage.
Ecclesiasticus 44:18 Therefore was there a remnant left to the earth, when the flood came.
Isaias 10:20-21 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and they that shall escape of the house of Jacob, shall lean no more upon him that striketh them: but they shall lean upon the Lord the Holy One of Israel, in truth.
The remnant shall be converted, the remnant, I say, of Jacob, to the mighty God.
Isaias 37:32 For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a, remnant, and salvation from mount Sion: the zeal of the Lord of hosts shall do this
Jeremias 15:11 The Lord saith to me: Assuredly it shall be well with thy remnant, assuredly I shall help thee in the time of affliction, and in the time of tribulation against the enemy.​

Romans 9:27 And Isaias crieth out concerning Israel: If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved.
Romans 11:5 Even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant saved according to the election of grace.

 

[TNT]

chevalier:

Well, I forgot to add something. I don’t really enjoy the modern practice of kissing for the sign of peace.

I don’t kiss males, ever, unless they are older relatives whom I don’t want to offend. Cheek only and there’s no exception here. I kiss females, but it’s for friends or relatives, and it’s still just the cheek with next to no exception.

I don’t want to kiss males at all. I feel less uncomfortable about kissing females, but I don’t want anyone to kiss me on the lips.

And you never know what the other person will try to do and where or how to kiss.

Are you refering to an orgy or a Novus Ordo Missae?

 

[BulldogCath]

Thank you Sue

You are charitable and kind to the tired Bulldog

Teresita:

I think the confusion comes because ‘minister’ is one of the standard Protestant - mainly non-conformist - word for the pastor of a church. In the old Roman Missal, the word (as you’ve shown yourself) was used to mean anyone with responsibility in the sanctuary except the celebrant. The word in Latin means ‘one who helps’, and it had that meaning originally in English: remember Hamlet’s ‘Angels and ministers of grace defend us!’? So in that sense, it’s quite justifable for anyone who ‘lends a hand’ in the sanctuary or wherever to be called a ‘minister’.

But I suppose that Bulldog is worried more by the appearance of numerous layfolk in the sanctuary, doling out Communion, taking our Lord to the sick, etc, than by the word used to describe them. And that worry isn’t countered by pointing out the word ministri in the old Missal:tsktsk: . (Sorry about the smiley: my son, who’s reading this over my shoulder, insisted I put one in, and this one appealed.)

Sue

 

[BulldogCath]

Thank you Sue

You are charitable to the tired Bulldog here

And I like the Smily by the way, adds a little color

Teresita:

I think the confusion comes because ‘minister’ is one of the standard Protestant - mainly non-conformist - word for the pastor of a church. In the old Roman Missal, the word (as you’ve shown yourself) was used to mean anyone with responsibility in the sanctuary except the celebrant. The word in Latin means ‘one who helps’, and it had that meaning originally in English: remember Hamlet’s ‘Angels and ministers of grace defend us!’? So in that sense, it’s quite justifable for anyone who ‘lends a hand’ in the sanctuary or wherever to be called a ‘minister’.

But I suppose that Bulldog is worried more by the appearance of numerous layfolk in the sanctuary, doling out Communion, taking our Lord to the sick, etc, than by the word used to describe them. And that worry isn’t countered by pointing out the word ministri in the old Missal:tsktsk: . (Sorry about the smiley: my son, who’s reading this over my shoulder, insisted I put one in, and this one appealed.)

Sue

 

[BulldogCath]

Nota, for some reason, has a real dislike and disgust for the TLM and those who hold tradition dear-I wonder if Old St Thomas or St Ignatius etc were to wake up in his or her bedroom would Nota have this same disgust for them.

I doubt it

TNT:

Proof positive, here we have alien visitors from other planets…err prot bigots.

 

[katolik]

rayne89:

Ok here goes.
If by Traditionalist it means
–would prefer those in religious life to wear a habit
-would prefer to recieve communion kneeling
-would prefer communion not in the hand
-would prefer not to have bongos at Mass
-would prefer only male alter servers
than yes I am

The difference between you and a Catholic Traditionalist is that you use mere opinion while Traditionalists believe this to be the only way, that is the Catholic way.

rayne89:

But if by traditionlist you mean
-would prefer the TLM
-believes communion can only be recieved on the tongue
-believes one should only recieve communion on ones knees
-believe the Mass should only be in latin
-believe the NO mass to be invalid
-believes those who attend the TLM are “better” Catholics

Not jsut prefer the TLM, love it and cherish the Mass of All Ages.

Hand communia
let us see what the Popes saith
"…a journalist asked John Paul II the following question: “Holy Father, what is your opinion with reference to Communion in the hand?” To which the Pope responded: "There is an apostolic letter on the existence of a special valid permission for this. But I tell you that I am not in favor of this practice, nor do I recommend it. The permission was granted due to the insistence of some diocesan bishops."

Holy Communion, received kneeling is the Roman/Latin tradition.
Latin is also under the same category for the Latin Rite.
No true traditionalist says that all NO Masses are invalid. In many places the NO Mass is said in such a manner that deems it invalid. How many parishes don’t use normal hosts at Mass? How many priests have told us that the Eucharist is only a symbol of Christ not Him in the Flesh.

Your last complaint is an invention. I have never or any of my friends have called TLM attending Catholics better Catholics.

rayne89:

I attend a parish where the NO is done beautifully and reverantly. There is a considerable amount of latin sprinkled in. We have kneelers to recieve communion. There are only male alter servers (and alot of them.) There is no inclusive language added. Only a priest or deacon says the homliy. The tabernacle is behind the alter where it should be. 95% of people genuflect before entering their pew. It isn’t unusual to see a family with 6 or more children. Confession is offered before every Mass. There are at least 3 Masses available every day. We don’t hold hands during the Our Father. Homilies include church teaching, address abortion, birthcontrol, gay marriage, confession, vocations to the priesthood ect. We have several young men that go off to seminary every year. Ya’ll get the point.

Anyway I have been considerably turned off by the TLM since joining the forum simply because of the attitude of many (not all) of those who attend the TLM and attack the NO with great fervor. Whether they mean to or not they portray a very elitest attitude. I actually had a poster here tell me he had no doubt that I would end up attending the TLM like him despite the fact that the NO is celebrated as it should be at my parish.

Yes I am well aware of abuses in NO. I used to belong to a parish that had plenty of them. What I have said over and over again it is not the NO that is the problem, it is the lack of understanding and the lack of education of laity about these things that are abuses. Things that are not permitted in the NO.

The way some people talk about the TLM I would feel under a microscope while attending. Like they would be watching and waiting for me to do something wrong.

For those that know mw a little better here -yes I’m well aware our (wonderful, orthodox) priest does the TLM indult at another local parish. I still perfer the Mass in English. I prefer the priest’s face to his back.

The focus on the priest’s face changes the emphasis of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of the Body and Blood of Christ being the center, it is the priest. The priest becomes the center of attention instead of Christ. Cardinal Ratzinger, has written extensively on this and he is hardly a traditionalist. He has said that the “table” altar is hardly as good as it is told to be.

 

[chevalier]

Perhaps some of the priest-centrism is due to his acting in persona Christi (“My body”, not “His body”). Anyway, one can have a Novus Ordo mass with the priest facing the altar. The Pope actually does that - the photo was on a traditionalist site, so if the Pope had actually been saying a Tridentine mass at that time, it would have been pointed out. The Pope is also said to say Tridentine masses in private, anyway.

And you could have a Tridentine mass with the priest facing the people. It’s not a Vaticanum II invention, it was around since the beginning, if not mentioned often. Perhaps permission and sufficient reason would be needed, I don’t know.

On Maundy Thursday, Lord Jesus was neither face or back to his Apostles. And He was either sitting or lying down, so were they. This is what keeps me from complaining too much about receiving when standing or receiving in hand. But I have issues with bishops telling people to receive standing instead of kneeling, which is the church’s default position. Local churches shouldn’t outlaw the default custom. It already makes me feel uncomfortable when I have to receive standing because of special circumstances and without special circumstances, it’s a pain. It makes me torn between making a spectacle of myself and kneeling down unlike the other people and receiving in a position I don’t find proper. I am kneeling in my heart whenever I have to receive standing.

 

[Nota_Bene]

katolik:

The focus on the priest’s face changes the emphasis of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of the Body and Blood of Christ being the center, it is the priest. The priest becomes the center of attention instead of Christ. Cardinal Ratzinger, has written extensively on this and he is hardly a traditionalist. He has said that the “table” altar is hardly as good as it is told to be.

Thankfully the Catholic Church disagrees with your personal opinion.

 

[Nota_Bene]

chevalier:

Perhaps some of the priest-centrism is due to his acting in persona Christi (“My body”, not “His body”). Anyway, one can have a Novus Ordo mass with the priest facing the altar. The Pope actually does that - the photo was on a traditionalist site, so if the Pope had actually been saying a Tridentine mass at that time, it would have been pointed out. The Pope is also said to say Tridentine masses in private, anyway.

And you could have a Tridentine mass with the priest facing the people. It’s not a Vaticanum II invention, it was around since the beginning, if not mentioned often. Perhaps permission and sufficient reason would be needed, I don’t know.

On Maundy Thursday, Lord Jesus was neither face or back to his Apostles. And He was either sitting or lying down, so were they. This is what keeps me from complaining too much about receiving when standing or receiving in hand. But I have issues with bishops telling people to receive standing instead of kneeling, which is the church’s default position. Local churches shouldn’t outlaw the default custom. It already makes me feel uncomfortable when I have to receive standing because of special circumstances and without special circumstances, it’s a pain. It makes me torn between making a spectacle of myself and kneeling down unlike the other people and receiving in a position I don’t find proper. I am kneeling in my heart whenever I have to receive standing.

It’s also well documented that Pope JPII allows communion-in-hand even in his own private chapel…

 

[Exporter]

Noa Bean,

Originally Posted by katolik
*

The focus on the priest’s face changes the emphasis of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of the Body and Blood of Christ being the center, it is the priest. The priest becomes the center of attention instead of Christ. Cardinal Ratzinger, has written extensively on this and he is hardly a traditionalist. He has said that the “table” altar is hardly as good as it is told to be.*

---

By Nota Bene,
Thankfully the Catholic Church disagrees with your personal opinion.

---

“Thankfully the Catholic Church disagrees with your personal opinion” N.B. I suppose you consider yourself a BETTER Catholic than katolic. How can I tell you in a post so I will not be banned?

That short remark was not only Arrogant but it was totally uncalled for. The man was only telling us what Cardinal Ratsinger has written. Nota Bene , I suppose you ( in your personal opinion) Disagree with the most influential Cardinal in the Vatican.

Nota Bene, is it true that you have lashed out at certain posters? As a Brother Catholic I would ask you to be a bit more charitable.

 

[TNT]

Nota Bene:

It’s also well documented that Pope JPII allows communion-in-hand even in his own private chapel…

Other things “ALLOWED” :

Matthew 19:8 He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful to me, but all things are not expedient. All things are lawful to me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Marie:

Speaking of Missal’s, has anyone bought the New 1962 Roman Catholic Daily Missal -Pre-Vatican Mass.

I found it online and am thinking of purchasing it…Here

Ummmmm…a word to the wise…that missal is published by Angelus Press which is closely associated with the SSPX .

Personally, I wouldn’t give a dime, even indirectly, to schismatics.

Besides, I’m going to have my late dad’s old missal (St. Andrews ) rebound so I can use it. I think it will be neat to use the same missal he used when he first converted to the Faith back in the 50’s.

 

[Nota_Bene]

Exporter:

Noa Bean,

Originally Posted by katolik

The focus on the priest’s face changes the emphasis of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of the Body and Blood of Christ being the center, it is the priest. The priest becomes the center of attention instead of Christ. Cardinal Ratzinger, has written extensively on this and he is hardly a traditionalist. He has said that the “table” altar is hardly as good as it is told to be.

---

By Nota Bene,
Thankfully the Catholic Church disagrees with your personal opinion.

---

“Thankfully the Catholic Church disagrees with your personal opinion” N.B. I suppose you consider yourself a BETTER Catholic than katolic. How can I tell you in a post so I will not be banned?

That short remark was not only Arrogant but it was totally uncalled for. The man was only telling us what Cardinal Ratsinger has written. Nota Bene , I suppose you ( in your personal opinion) Disagree with the most influential Cardinal in the Vatican.

Nota Bene, is it true that you have lashed out at certain posters? As a Brother Catholic I would ask you to be a bit more charitable.

Your conjecture needs to be noted as such. It’s almost as if you are trying to suggest your personal notions are fact…

 

[katolik]

Dr. Bombay:

Ummmmm…a word to the wise…that missal is published by Angelus Press which is closely associated with the SSPX .

Personally, I wouldn’t give a dime, even indirectly, to schismatics.

Besides, I’m going to have my late dad’s old missal (St. Andrews ) rebound so I can use it. I think it will be neat to use the same missal he used when he first converted to the Faith back in the 50’s.

The St.Andrews Missal is not designed for the Indult Masses or the SSPX said Masses because it has the pre1955 Holy Week and the confiteor before Communion. You’ll be confused around Easter time.

I have had people ask FSSP priests on the internet if they should buy this and they said that they should.
You give dimes to the local Muslim working at the gas station, dollars to the local Protestants and yet they SSPX is not deserving of this?

 

[TNT]

Dr. Bombay:

Ummmmm…a word to the wise…that missal is published by Angelus Press which is closely associated with the SSPX .

Personally,** I wouldn't give a dime, even indirectly, to schismatics. **

Really?

Please take note of how much you buy that says “Made in China”, mostly by slave labor, and a Godless nation. The Chinese Catholic Church in full blown schism in evey traditional sense of the word.

But, if you can point to a 1962 Missal made by a Catholic press in good standing, let us know about it. To condemn a Missal, even though it is the best, and not offering any good alternatives, is not realistic, nor helpful.

Originally Posted by Marie
Speaking of Missal’s, has anyone bought the New 1962 Roman Catholic Daily Missal -Pre-Vatican Mass.

Here is a site of posters that have lengthy discussions on that Missal, and an alternative one, along with the old St Andrew Missal (loved by sede’s no less).

They are actual buyers and users. Hope this helps.

 

[rayne89]

katolik:

The difference between you and a Catholic Traditionalist is that you use mere opinion while Traditionalists believe this to be the only way, that is the Catholic way.

Not jsut prefer the TLM, love it and cherish the Mass of All Ages.

Hand communia
let us see what the Popes saith
"…a journalist asked John Paul II the following question: “Holy Father, what is your opinion with reference to Communion in the hand?” To which the Pope responded: "There is an apostolic letter on the existence of a special valid permission for this. But I tell you that I am not in favor of this practice, nor do I recommend it. The permission was granted due to the insistence of some diocesan bishops."

Holy Communion, received kneeling is the Roman/Latin tradition.
Latin is also under the same category for the Latin Rite.
No true traditionalist says that all NO Masses are invalid. In many places the NO Mass is said in such a manner that deems it invalid. How many parishes don’t use normal hosts at Mass? How many priests have told us that the Eucharist is only a symbol of Christ not Him in the Flesh.

Your last complaint is an invention. I have never or any of my friends have called TLM attending Catholics better Catholics.

The focus on the priest’s face changes the emphasis of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of the Body and Blood of Christ being the center, it is the priest. The priest becomes the center of attention instead of Christ. Cardinal Ratzinger, has written extensively on this and he is hardly a traditionalist. He has said that the “table” altar is hardly as good as it is told to be.

Your last complaint is an invention. I have never or any of my friends have called TLM attending Catholics better Catholics.
**
Invention by me? When I have little more time to search (probably tonight) I’ll see if I can find the quotes from the other threads that make my point.

And I did say I prefer communion on the tongue but as long as it is permitted by the Church (which it is) I will not rebuke people for taking it in the hand. Not in favor, or do not recommend is not the same as not allowed. If it was not allowed than I would be 100% against.

The focus on the priest’s face changes the emphasis of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of the Body and Blood of Christ being the center, it is the priest. The priest becomes the center of attention instead of Christ

I’ve never had a problem focusing on the Body of Christ at Mass, even the least ideal Masses I’ve ever attended. This is just as bad as protestants saying having Mary statues takes away the focus on Jesus. My gosh we are intelligent human beings, seeing the priests face instead of his back suddenly makes us loose our focus on the Body and Blood of our Lord? Yeah and honoring Mary makes us forget about Jesus. Whatever.

 

[Nota_Bene]

TNT:

Really?

Please take note of how much you buy that says “Made in China”, mostly by slave labor, and a Godless nation. The Chinese Catholic Church in full blown schism in evey traditional sense of the word.

But, if you can point to a 1962 Missal made by a Catholic press in good standing, let us know about it. To condemn a Missal, even though it is the best, and not offering any good alternatives, is not realistic, nor helpful.

Here is a site of posters that have lengthy discussions on that Missal, and an alternative one, along with the old St Andrew Missal (loved by sede’s no less).

They are actual buyers and users. Hope this helps.

Did you just make that up or is it a new Protestant sect akin to the SSPX?

 

[BulldogCath]

Your worried about giving money to SSPX???-when the money that you put every week in your collection plate goes to pay off pedophelia cases-and guess where it is going now, if you have not read the papers lately-the Catholic church is taking our Tsunami relief money and buying some clothes and MUSLIM prayer packages for the largly Muslim people who were effected by the Tsunami. This has taken place in the Australian Catholic church and others in the US, I guess in the spirit of Ecumenism. Get that-to pay the lawyers and to keep the Muslims ready with their blankets and Koran. I dont give a dime anymore in the collection plate-I mail it directly to the cause. USA today recently publised how much each states diocese was in the hole in legal fees and awards and it was astonishing-If I recall it between $500M-$1B but no one wants to release-I think Boston alone is over $100M with 3 diocese bankrupt already.

At least when I go to the traditional church-I know the money is going to build more seminaries and but more chapels. My uncle and the Parishoners there dedicate their own time-like in the church of old- to repair the church, put in AC, and donate time to the grounds.
Dr. Bombay:

Ummmmm…a word to the wise…that missal is published by Angelus Press which is closely associated with the SSPX .

Personally, I wouldn’t give a dime, even indirectly, to schismatics.

Besides, I’m going to have my late dad’s old missal (St. Andrews ) rebound so I can use it. I think it will be neat to use the same missal he used when he first converted to the Faith back in the 50’s.

 

[Nota_Bene]

BulldogCath:

Your worried about giving money to SSPX???-when the money that you put every week in your collection plate goes to pay off pedophelia cases-and guess where it is going now, if you have not read the papers lately-the Catholic church is taking our Tsunami relief money and buying some clothes and MUSLIM prayer packages for the largly Muslim people who were effected by the Tsunami. This has taken place in the Australian Catholic church and others in the US, I guess in the spirit of Ecumenism. Get that-to pay the lawyers and to keep the Muslims ready with their blankets and Koran. I dont give a dime anymore in the collection plate-I mail it directly to the cause. USA today recently publised how much each states diocese was in the hole in legal fees and awards and it was astonishing-If I recall it between $500M-$1B but no one wants to release-I think Boston alone is over $100M with 3 diocese bankrupt already.

At least when I go to the traditional church-I know the money is going to build more seminaries and but more chapels. My uncle and the Parishoners there dedicate their own time-like in the church of old- to repair the church, put in AC, and donate time to the grounds.

Homosexual rapes by Catholic priests somehow justifies supporting SSPX versus Catholic publishers? You need a course in critical thinking.