A
archangel04
Guest
I am in the same boat as you are
- Status
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
So-called because they call themselves such. I’ve rarely or never heard someone refer to themselves as a ‘Novus Ordo Catholic’, or any other such title, but simply ‘Catholic’ or ‘Roman Catholic’. Traditionalists, though, feel the need for clarification apparently. Lower-case ‘t’ because, as noted earlier, we’re dealing with traditions (e.g., Mass in Latin) and not Sacred Tradition.
The obsession with the “Third Secret” is a prime example. It really doesn’t matter what it is. The message of Fatima is “pray and do penance”. If you miss that, you’ve missed it. The Holy See has said it has released the content of the “Third Secret”, and yet some just can’t let their obsession go and conjure up all sorts of conspiracy theories.
Here is a good example. Devil eyes? Please…
H
Holly3278
Guest
How about the myth that all traditionalist Catholics are either members of the SSPX or are Sedevacantists?
O
Onegin
Guest
I got sucked into the propaganda (within Catholic circles) for a while that Traditionalist = SSPX, which = bad. Fortunately I saw through the hype but not after having digested the misinformation and saying some terribly cruel and untrue things about the Society which I regret to this day.
Another myth is that everyone who attends the TLM is a G.K. Chesterton-reading, cigar-smoking, Latin-speaking member of the intellectual elite. Yeah, there are people who like to play that up but they should be disregarded - many times such people are only interested in the TLM because it makes them look better or they like the intellectual complexity of the Mass. As for the traditionalists who later develop this behaviour, it can be extremely off-putting for someone who is new to tradition.
If I could dispel a myth it would be that the people who attend the TLM are normal people who just want to preserve the Mass and the Faith in its entirety.
T
Timothy17
Guest
Actually, in this case even the Catechism is touchy when it comes to the “t” of Sacred Tradition. Mere tradition is just that, mere tradition; whereas Sacred Tradition is a reference to the authoritative teachings of the Apostles themselves, and is distinguished with a capital “T” always. It is part of the Deposit and Rule of Faith, along with the Magisterium and Sacred Scripture.
C
CradleCath
Guest
First, as a traditional Catholic. I’ll say that “Tradition in Action” is NOT a traditional Roman Catholic site. I don’t think that it’s really a Catholic site, period. From what I have learned about TIA., it has a sedevacantist (seat of Peter is vacant) group that runs it.The obsession with the “Third Secret” is a prime example. It really doesn’t matter what it is. The message of Fatima is “pray and do penance”. If you miss that, you’ve missed it. The Holy See has said it has released the content of the “Third Secret”, and yet some just can’t let their obsession go and conjure up all sorts of conspiracy theories.
Here is a good example. Devil eyes? Please…
If you are truly interested in learning anything about us “trads”, put “Traditional Catholic, Latin Rite” in your search engine whenever you want to do a search, about our beliefs re Fatima, the lack of emphasis on the Sacrifice found within the Novus Ordo, etc. This is a site that will tell you what we think about the Tridentine Mass:
latin-mass-society.org/preston.htm
However, sites like TIA. & Traditio would have you believe that they are part of Roman Catholicism. They are not.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
No such thing as a “Novus Ordo” Catholic.
Just because you chose to apply the label of traditional to Catholic to describe yourself does not grant you the right to apply labels to others.
IMHO there are just Catholics. Labels such as these are divisive.
How is it nontraditional to attend the Liturgy of the Church?
What defines a “traditional” Catholic besides a preference for the EF Mass?
C
CradleCath
Guest
The fact that the Mass = Calvary & not the Last Supper is indeed a part of the Deposit Of Faith. The emphasis of our saving Mass must always be on Calvary, on the Sacrifice, on the. propitiatory nature of the Mass…according to Sacred Tradition. I think that one of the biggest **myths of Catholicism **is that it’s O.K. to stress the Communal Meal (the Last Supper) as the focus of the Novus Ordo Mass.
“The Sacrifice of the Mass is not merely an offering of praise and thanksgiving, or simply a memorial of the sacrifice on the Cross. **It is a propitiatory sacrifice which is offered for the living and dead, for the **remission of sins and punishment due to sin, as satisfaction for sin and for other necessities.”
therealpresence.org/eucharst/link/e-litur.html
The humility, the knowledge that we in no way deserve this Mass, this re-presentation of the sacrifice required by God (of Himself), the acceptance of our own sinfulness & the recognition that God made us acceptable anyway…just isn’t present, IMO., in the contemporary Novus Ordo, I especially notice this lack of humility in the priests that celebrate it.
The Prayers At the Foot of the Altar, when the priest is praying for himself…that he be made worthy to even approach the altar, the extra Confiteor, when the priest asks for forgiveness…striking his breast three times as he repeats Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa…all of these things are missing in the Novus Ordo. Though they may be small (t) tradition, but they lead directly to the lack of the sense of awe that we should surely feel.
F
floresco
Guest
It is this aspect of the TLM that is most important for me and, I have the impression, for a significant proportion of traditional Catholics. I think that another myth is that it is all about the Latin. While, in my experience, most traditional Catholics think the Latin is important, they would take a vernacular version of the TLM over a Latin OF Mass.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
biggest myth about TCers? “You are not responding to the spirit of Vatican 2”
Virtually the only people in my world (directly responsible for liturgy & catechesis) who have actually read the V2 documents are the traditional, orthodox, obedient Catholic laity, religious and clergy.
Virtually the only people in my world (directly responsible for liturgy & catechesis) who have actually read the V2 documents are the traditional, orthodox, obedient Catholic laity, religious and clergy.
F
floresco
Guest
It’s a good thing that I don’t smoke cigars or I might be offended at this. Even so, two out of three, maybe I should be offended anyhow.
Seriously though, you almost make it sound like there is something wrong with liking Chesterton or Latin. I’m not being pretentious. I really like them.
L
Lazarette
Guest
ByzCath,
*No such thing as a “Novus Ordo” Catholic.
Just because you chose to apply the label of traditional to Catholic to describe yourself does not grant you the right to apply labels to others.
IMHO there are just Catholics. Labels such as these are divisive*.
Bravo! :clapping:
CradleCath,
the Communal Meal (the Last Supper) as the focus of the Novus Ordo Mass.
Where is that in the newer Missal? The Sacrifice of the Mass is the same, whether OF or EF.
Revert Jen,
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?
One thing is that you’d be less likely to make such broad stroke generalizations as you did in your post. A more complete answer would take more time than I have at the moment.
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’ve never heard that. My experience is more of younger people who unfortunately have seen the worst of the new and the best of the old.
There’s a reason why those in the 55 age you mentioned choose to not attend the EF. As happens in every generation,the younger generation thinks their parents are too thick to understand what the younger generation sees. The younger generation seem unable to realize that if they had grown up in their parents’ generation, they would have done the same thing. My only consolation is that the present generation will have kids who will look on them the same way.
*No such thing as a “Novus Ordo” Catholic.
Just because you chose to apply the label of traditional to Catholic to describe yourself does not grant you the right to apply labels to others.
IMHO there are just Catholics. Labels such as these are divisive*.
Bravo! :clapping:
CradleCath,
the Communal Meal (the Last Supper) as the focus of the Novus Ordo Mass.
Where is that in the newer Missal? The Sacrifice of the Mass is the same, whether OF or EF.
Revert Jen,
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?
One thing is that you’d be less likely to make such broad stroke generalizations as you did in your post. A more complete answer would take more time than I have at the moment.
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’ve never heard that. My experience is more of younger people who unfortunately have seen the worst of the new and the best of the old.
There’s a reason why those in the 55 age you mentioned choose to not attend the EF. As happens in every generation,the younger generation thinks their parents are too thick to understand what the younger generation sees. The younger generation seem unable to realize that if they had grown up in their parents’ generation, they would have done the same thing. My only consolation is that the present generation will have kids who will look on them the same way.
R
revert_jen
Guest
“More complete answer”? You haven’t given any answer at all. I was describing the feelings of someone my age attending the EF now. Since you aren’t my age, you wouldn’t have any direct evidence about how accurate that description was.
I never said and don’t think my parents are too thick to understand anything. Good grief. Talk about broad stroke generalizations.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’ve never heard that. My experience is more of younger people who unfortunately have seen the worst of the new and the best of the old.
There’s a reason why those in the 55 age you mentioned choose to not attend the EF. As happens in every generation,the younger generation thinks their parents are too thick to understand what the younger generation sees. The younger generation seem unable to realize that if they had grown up in their parents’ generation, they would have done the same thing. My only consolation is that the present generation will have kids who will look on them the same way.
–Jen
L
Lormar
Guest
You go, girl!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.
You’re on the right path.
C
CradleCath
Guest
Absolutely. I once took a poll on CA. & asked the Traditional Catholics, Latin Rite if they would still attend the Tridentine Mass, even if it were in English. 98% answered yes. I, like you, think that preserving the language of the Church is important. However, the fact that it is expiatory in it’s very essence is what really matters. Christ is actually present on the cross at the Tridentine Mass. No wonder our eyes are on the Tabernacle & Crucifix as we enter Church. No wonder we recieve the Eucharist on our knees.
Yes, the Tridentine Mass is a Mass for sinners. The emphasis is on the Sacrifice being offered because God demanded it. He gave His **own Son **for us.
I remember, as a young child, seeing the people entering the Church. (I got in trouble more than once for that, my parents didn’t approve of that at all), They were looking STRAIGHT AHEAD at the Tabernacle, at the large Crucifix above the altar, at the Sanctuary, the safe place that only the ordained protect from profanation. They didn’t look about to see if their friends were there, i saw no “mini-waves” in the Communion line, they didn’t seem too concerned about where they sat & even the old & infirm did their very best to genuflect before their Lord.
After 40 yrs. of attending the Novus Ordo, I can’t tell you what it does for me to see that nothing has changed. The same knowledge of the Sacrifice that is about to occur, in an unbloodly manner, is still inherent in this Mass.
EXPIATORY + Latin expiatus, past participle of expiare:
1. to atone for, to appease,
2. ato extinguish the guilt incurred, to make amends for
R
revert_jen
Guest
I’m sorry for the above post. It was greatly lacking in charity. Unfortunately it took more than 20 minutes for me to realize it, so I can’t change it now. Maybe a couple of clarifications may help.
When I was describing the feelings of someone my age upon attending the EF, it probably sounded like I meant that all people my age would feel that way. Certainly that isn’t true, and I didn’t mean that, but my wording was poor. But there are a good few who did, and possibly (sinfully) resented never having been allowed to see such a liturgy before.
My parents don’t appreciate the EF as I do, not because they are of a different generation, but because they are different people. My mother hasn’t gone to Mass at all for years (please pray for her!) and my father isn’t good at languages, so he really appreciates the Mass in English.
My point about not caring what it was like in the 50s is actually relevant although it may not seem so at first glance. I don’t want to bring back the 50s. How could I want to give up all of the wonderful teachings of our last two Popes (which are the ones I remember clearly, meaning nothing against the Popes before)? I don’t want to outlaw the OF. I would like to see the OF celebrated reverently, according to its rubrics, and I look forward gladly to the new translation. But I think that more widespread celebration of the EF will help the celebration of the OF to be more reverent, and being experienced with the OF will help people understand what is happening in the EF.
There is nothing wrong with having experience of both the EF and the OF and choosing to attend the OF, assuming it is celebrated licitly. But I do think it would be good if more people had sufficient experience of both.
Maybe the myth about young (well, younger–I don’t exactly qualify as young any more), traditionalist Catholics is that they think their parents are dense.
–Jen
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
1.- Traditional Catholics call themselves Traditional because they follow Tradition.So-called because they call themselves such. I’ve rarely or never heard someone refer to themselves as a ‘Novus Ordo Catholic’, or any other such title, but simply ‘Catholic’ or ‘Roman Catholic’. Traditionalists, though, feel the need for clarification apparently. Lower-case ‘t’ because, as noted earlier, we’re dealing with traditions (e.g., Mass in Latin) and not Sacred Tradition.
The obsession with the “Third Secret” is a prime example. It really doesn’t matter what it is. The message of Fatima is “pray and do penance”. If you miss that, you’ve missed it. The Holy See has said it has released the content of the “Third Secret”, and yet some just can’t let their obsession go and conjure up all sorts of conspiracy theories.
Here is a good example. Devil eyes? Please…
2.- No, the Holy See didn’t release the Third Secret of Fatima. They released a fake secret. Do you honestly believe the Third Secret was about the assassination attempt of JPII? Think about it. The false secret claims a figure dressed in white was walking through a field of dead bodies and then was shot dead after a soldier fired an arrow at him. In reality, JPII was not killed, there were no dead bodies, it was a single man not a group of soldiers (not was he a soldier), and it was a bullet not an arrow. Not to mention not a word was spoken by Our Lady in that so-called “Third Secret”. That is what really gives it away. If they had released the real Third Secret of Fatima we wouldn’t be debating about it.
3.- I’ve seen that link before. That does not at all sum up the beliefs of Traditional Catholics. However, I will say that in those pictures the eyes of Benedict XVI look rather creepy.
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
I meant people who go to the Novus Ordo. They’re just given the name “Novus Ordo Catholics”.
The Novus Ordo is not the true Liturgy of the Church. I’m not going to go into deep discussion on that, but it is not the true Liturgy. You aren’t a Traditional Catholic just because you go to the TLM. A Traditional Catholic is someone who goes by Tradition.
F
floresco
Guest
If the Pope declares that a liturgy is the ordinary form of the Mass, then I consider that makes it a true liturgy of the Church. I probably agree with you about any specific flaws you might identify in it, but in this I disagree.
Any Catholic who accepts Church teaching goes by Tradition. When I call myself a traditional Catholic, I’m saying that I value what has been handed on by my ancestors in faith. I think the TLM is an objectively better Mass and I prefer to attend it. I follow traditional devotional practices. I interpret any ambiguities I encounter in recent Church documents in light of tradition and Tradition.
I
IntegraCatholic
Guest
Original definition of Mass (1969 missal): The Lord’s Supper or Mass is a sacred meeting or assembly of the People of God, met together under the presidency of the priest, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord. Thus the promise of Christ, “where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them”, is eminently true of the local community in the Church (Mt. XVIII, 20).
This heretical definition had to be changed (though not to a good definition, just one that wasn’t clearly heretical). The burden of recalling all the missals printed with this heretical definition put Benzinger Brothers out of business.
- Status