Biggest Myths About Traditional Catholics

[Seamus_L]

The biggest one for me at the moment is this idea that we all supposedly believe that everything was perfect in the Church before the 1960’s, and that if we knew what things were really like we might not want to bring back the Latin Mass.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Hey, guess what? Catholics are not only Christians, we’re the FIRST Christians. No, really.

 

[Lazarette]

The biggest one for me at the moment is this idea that we all supposedly believe that everything was perfect in the Church before the 1960’s, and that if we knew what things were really like we might not want to bring back the Latin Mass.

Okay, I’ll bite. Just how old were you in, say, 1967?

 

[corsair]

Well, I don’t know about Seamus but in 1967 I was 27 years old. And I’m a convert (1970).

The thing that really gets me is that Trads have been called “elitists”. That sort of burns me a little. All I wanted when I converted was the Mass that had intrigued me for about 15 years. Two weeks after I was Baptised I was introduced to the NO (OF).

As a trad, I have felt robbed for all these years. and I have gotten a little touchy about this OF thing. Remember all the lies we were told about the latin Mass being “outlawed”, and the hand holding, and how about the cursillo, and how about an Archbishop telling me that the Catholic church was “just like communism” therefore communism was good.(1971). I remember the hippie music groups on stage.

sorry, got carried away.

 

[JMJ_coder]

The biggest one for me at the moment is this idea that we all supposedly believe that everything was perfect in the Church before the 1960’s, and that if we knew what things were really like we might not want to bring back the Latin Mass.

Well, do you think that everything was perfect in the Church before the 1960’s? If not, what things do you think needed to be addressed at that time?

 

[JMJ_coder]

Not so much a myth, but an observation is that the so called “traditionalists” seem to be somewhat preoccupied (obsessed may be a better term in some cases) with Marian apparitions. I’m not talking about, say, believing that Fatima is for real and trying to make the First Saturday Devotions – but, as an example, the obsession over the “Third Secret” of Fatima.

Certainly not all who identify themselves as a traditionalist have such preoccupations, and to be fair, there are some people off their medication that give a many a good traditionalist a bad name with their wacko web sites.

 

[Seamus_L]

I was around in 67, but I don’t have much memory of the Latin Mass, I did however have my parents, aunts, uncles and a good many older people who grew up with it, and who helped instill in me a love of Catholic Tradition.

 

[yellowdaisy]

I dont know if I count as a “traditionalist” or not, but my husband and I are CERTAINLY more traditional than much of our parish.

The biggest myth in my universe is that I wear a headcovering at mass because my husband is an abusive tyrant who hates women If only they knew he had nothing to do with it…

 

[revert_jen]

Well, do you think that everything was perfect in the Church before the 1960’s? If not, what things do you think needed to be addressed at that time?

Well, I was admittedly not born in 1967, but I don’t think that everything was perfect. I think that there was probably more hypocrisy, more concern with (lower-case) tradition than there should have been, a not insignificant number of people “going through the motions” without dedicating themselves to Christ in their hearts, too much watching what everyone else was doing, and too much concern for the letter of the law.

OTOH, I think there were more people (no I do NOT mean all, but more than now) who understood and believed in the doctrine of transubstantiation (and who could spell it without looking it up, unlike myself), fewer people murdering their babies either through abortion or abortifacient methods of birth control, more people who understood that the teachings of the Church are not a salad bar, from which you select whichever pieces you feel like eating at the moment, and less (I do not mean none!) fornication, because people knew that, at least for most people, chastity is in fact possible.

The old days, as far as I can tell by talking to my parents, had the virtues of their defects and vice versa. However, now we have lost the virtues as well as the defects, and a wider use of the EF might help the virtues grow, while the teachings of VII, JPII and BXVI might help prevent the defects.

Anyway, to return to the subject of the thread, I think the biggest myth about self-identifying traditionalists is that they/we are anything like a homogenous group. It’s more of a continuum, from people who like the EF and think more Latin and more chant should be used in the OF (but are still comfortable attending a properly celebrated OF Mass), all the way to the sedevacantists.

–Jen

 

[floresco]

I’ve run into people who think that traditional Catholics are all about racism and anti-semitism. While I have encountered some trads like that, I would not say that they characterize the movement.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Not so much a myth, but an observation is that the so called “traditionalists” seem to be somewhat preoccupied (obsessed may be a better term in some cases) with Marian apparitions. I’m not talking about, say, believing that Fatima is for real and trying to make the First Saturday Devotions – but, as an example, the obsession over the “Third Secret” of Fatima.

Certainly not all who identify themselves as a traditionalist have such preoccupations, and to be fair, there are some people off their medication that give a many a good traditionalist a bad name with their wacko web sites.

I found this post to be rather insulting to Traditional Catholics. I have a few questions to ask if you don’t mind.

1.- What do you mean by “the so-called traditionalists”? By the way, I believe you mean Traditionalists with an upper-case T.

2.- How are we in any way “obsessed” with apparitions of Mary? The debate over the Third Secret is about the fact that it has not been released yet and the one released in 2000 is a fake. That isn’t obsession, that’s trying to help people understand. Would you rather us be like the Protestants and not even pray to Mary or care about her apparitions?

3.- What do you mean by “their wacko web sites”? I’d like you to please elaborate on this line, I’m a bit puzzled by what you mean here.

 

[Lazarette]

Well, I don’t know about Seamus but in 1967 I was 27 years old. And I’m a convert (1970).

The thing that really gets me is that Trads have been called “elitists”. That sort of burns me a little. All I wanted when I converted was the Mass that had intrigued me for about 15 years. Two weeks after I was Baptised I was introduced to the NO (OF).

As a trad, I have felt robbed for all these years. and I have gotten a little touchy about this OF thing. Remember all the lies we were told about the latin Mass being “outlawed”, and the hand holding, and how about the cursillo, and how about an Archbishop telling me that the Catholic church was “just like communism” therefore communism was good.(1971). I remember the hippie music groups on stage.

sorry, got carried away.

Corsair, reading your post reminded me of how difficult that time was for those who lived through it. I landed on the OF side but do understand the pain of those who missed what is now the EF.

um, hippie music groups on stage? In connection with Mass?

Ouch on the misinformed archbishop. (archbishop?!? yikes)

Cursillo was actually something positive, although like everything, it could have been misused.

You lived through that time and I can understand why you missed what is now the EF. I find patience more difficult with those who didn’t live through that time and by what they say, it’s clear they have no idea what it was like then.

 

[Lazarette]

I was around in 67, but I don’t have much memory of the Latin Mass, I did however have my parents, aunts, uncles and a good many older people who grew up with it, and who helped instill in me a love of Catholic Tradition.

You were/are fortunate to have a strongly Catholic family. Many others at the time weren’t, which was probably one reason for the changes. On the topic of this thread, there are many traditional Catholics today who do indeed view that time through the lens of today. Not all, but I run into a fair number of them, so I wouldn’t classify that one as a myth. Definitely not true of all tradition-leaning Catholics, but present enough to have truth to it.

 

[pnewton]

As a trad, I have felt robbed for all these years. and I have gotten a little touchy about this OF thing.

I found this post to be rather insulting to Traditional Catholics. I have a few questions to ask if you don’t mind.

1.- What do you mean by “the so-called traditionalists”? By the way, I believe you mean Traditionalists with an upper-case T.

Would it be fair to say traditional Catholics can be a bit touchy?

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Would it be fair to say traditional Catholics can be a bit touchy?

I could say the same thing about Novus Ordo Catholics, it gets us nowhere. Traditional Catholics are just that, Traditional.

 

[archangel04]

Well, do you think that everything was perfect in the Church before the 1960’s? If not, what things do you think needed to be addressed at that time?

That’s the one thing that always interest me, what were we up against before V2?

I think all these myths are myths that are still out there, but old. I think the newest myth and more popular is that Traditional Catholicism is just for “old” people. The myth that no young person wants to attend a “boring” mass said in a dead language is a big myth & lie. I am 25 and I just got my copy of 1962 missal In my opinion if the EF where to be introduce to young people, I really think they would preffer it, why is that? Because not only is it “new” to them, but also it can be challenging to learn the basic latin, and young people want and need that challenge.

I could say the same thing about Novus Ordo Catholics, it gets us nowhere. Traditional Catholics are just that, Traditional.

I think the other myth thats out there is that your only a “Traditional” Catholic if you attend the TLM, wrong. There are Traditional Catholics on both sides, and hypocrites on both as well. Education in the in the faith is key. I gues you could say that one good outcome that came out of all this is that you can distinguish cafeteria catholics with devout Catholics.
My 2 cents

 

[revert_jen]

You lived through that time and I can understand why you missed what is now the EF. I find patience more difficult with those who didn’t live through that time and by what they say, it’s clear they have no idea what it was like then.

I don’t know–was it easier for the people who were in their 20s or 30s before they first had the hint that there was anything even wrong with hippie masses? People who all of their lives may never have seen a reverently celebrated Mass? And then we walk into an EF Mass and compare it with the only Mass experiences we have ever had, and cry for the beauty of it, and the reverence of it, and the way it is centered on God and not the congregation.

You may not have patience with us. But we never even knew that the sacrifice of the Mass could be uplifting (half of us probably didn’t know the Mass was a sacrifice), and that it could communicate both the trancendental and immediate nature of God. And then we see that people had it and gave it up for dreadful music, everyday language, and holding hands. We don’t have to be nostalgic for the 50s, and as far as that goes we don’t actually care what it was like. What difference does it make to the beauty of the liturgy? We do know what the OF is generally like, and we long for more people to be exposed to the beauty of the EF enough times that they can make an informed decision for themselves about which Mass is a greater help to them in being closer to God.

There are reverent celebrations of the OF. But the only ones I’ve attended that had as much reverence as the EF, were celebrated in a church that also celebrated the EF. Perhaps it’s a coincidence. But I do frequently go to the OF in that parish–I have nothing against it. If my old parish had celebrated the OF that reverently, I might never have even gone to look at the EF.

I am totally in favor of the letter of Vatican II and totally against “the spirit of Vatican II,” which basically seems to be what people talk about when they want to make the Church into their own image. But I am a traditionalist in that I believe the wholesale jettisoning of 1900+ years of liturgical and devotional development during the course of, say 10 years, was a mistake.

–Jen (“Bathwater please move to the left, babies you come here to the right.”)

P.S. Obligatory part relevant to the thread: Another big myth is that anyone under about 55 who attends the EF is doing so because they grew up repressed by their traditionalist parents. I’m much more in favor of the EF than my parents are.

 

[pnewton]

I could say the same thing about Novus Ordo Catholics, it gets us nowhere.

And perhaps you would be right, although I would hope capitalization would not be a universally touchy subject.

 

[floresco]

And perhaps you would be right, although I would hope capitalization would not be a universally touchy subject.

I don’t capitalize the “traditional” in “traditional Catholic”. When I write capital T Tradition that refers to Divine Revelation. Small t tradition refers to customs that have been handed on. I call myself a traditional Catholic because I appreciate traditional practices of the Church. Presumably I share Tradition with all Catholics.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

pnewton;6652220:

Would it be fair to say traditional Catholics can be a bit touchy?

I could say the same thing about Novus Ordo Catholics, it gets us nowhere. Traditional Catholics are just that, Traditional.

How about being uptight with regards to secular entertainment/lifestyles?
Not that I’m generalizing but, meh, just a bit of my observation. :\