dealing with EF/OF tension

[floresco]

We see a lot of emotional tension here concerning disagreements over the forms of Mass and associated liturgical practices. I was seeing this same tension in my marriage. I prefer the EF and think its prayers are better expressions of Catholic theology. My spouse prefers the OF and does not understand my concerns about theology. The same dynamics that we see in so many threads - misunderstanding, suspicion, hostility - were eating away at my relationship with the person I love most in the world.

We were hurting and I knew this was wrong so I went to a priest for counselling. He gave me some advice that has been helping. So I am wondering if a similar change could take place in our discussions here. What if we recognized that the people we are fighting with are people we are supposed to love? What if we took being brothers and sisters in Christ as an important relationship?

I think that I have written things here that have contributed to bad feelings. And I have felt angry and impatient with others. I am sorry and I want to do better. I want to write what is true in a way that is fitting for people I love.

 

[Sirach2]

What if we recognized that the people we are fighting with are people we are supposed to love? What if we took being brothers and sisters in Christ as an important relationship?

Well said, Floresco.

I think the big problem is not letting the other rejoice in the form that God’s Holy Spirit is calling them to, and trying instead to reform the other into the image of our own mind as the more superior liturgy. This is alien to Catholicism and the teaching of our Holy Father, and I print his words, hoping that all who call themselves Catholic will follow the Shepherd, and let all brothers and sisters peacefully enjoy their preference of rite.

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.

It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.

May God grant us His grace and peace.

 

[floresco]

I think the big problem is not letting the other rejoice in the form that God’s Holy Spirit is calling them to, and trying instead to reform the other into the image of our own mind as the more superior liturgy.

I do believe that the EF is the superior liturgy. And I don’t see that there is anything wrong with respectfully presenting the reasons why I think so. But I can’t insist on a position being true unless the Church teaches it is true. If the Church does not teach it, then it is my fallible opinion.

This is the principle that I have been trying to use to navigate through these storms: I can not make claims that go beyond Church teaching. The Church is the teacher of truth and I can hold fast to the truths I receive from her. What I have not received as truth from the Church could be wrong and I can not hold on to it the same way.

 

[CWBetts]

I think what everyone has to remember is that both are equally valid, both are theologically sound, and what it really comes down to is a matter of preference.

 

[Newbie2]

I think what everyone has to remember is that both are equally valid, both are theologically sound, and what it really comes down to is a matter of preference.

I’ve never seen that notion put so precisely.

 

[JosephdeMaistre]

One of the reasons I broke up with a long term girlfriend before we married was because of this very issue - interpretation of traditional Catholic dogma. She was liberal, whereas I am traditional - it’s that important.

 

[CWBetts]

One of the reasons I broke up with a long term girlfriend before we married was because of this very issue - interpretation of traditional Catholic dogma. She was liberal, whereas I am traditional - it’s that important.

I agree, it is very important. I am pretty sure that I could not date someone who insisted on the EF exclusively, not could I date someone who was absolutely against the EF. I prefer the NO, but attend the EF upon occasion (about once a month). I think it is an issue that can be worked through, provided both parties can respect one another.

 

[Rachel_1]

As a newbie coming into the Faith let me tell you what this tension has done to me.
It has forced me to feel that I need to ‘choose sides’ when in the beginning of my journey of Faith I didn’t realize there was any issues like this.
For instance, when I was led to the Church I had my husband wanting to leave me, my daughter and son in law telling me I’d never see the grand kids again and all this tension in my house, so I came here, to these forums, hoping to find someone “on my side” so to speak. Instead, when I mentioned the type of Mass I went to I had others jump all over me like I was trying to say that the OF wasn’t valid or something, which I never said.
As a matter of fact, each week on Sat I go to the OF Mass and on Sunday, the EF… so I go to BOTH. I prefer the EF now that I understand what’s going on with it… I felt VERY drawn to the EF even before that though.
I think maybe that some folks here assume that just because someone goes to the EF Mass that they are going to say bad stuff about the OF and just start the attack first? I dunno… that’s just how it seems to me.
Now I don’t talk in these forums nearly as much as I feel that I get attacked all the time for whatever I may say, so I figure it’s just best to not say anything at all and just read. Occasionally though the forums will “nag” you to post something so here I am, posting now to avoid the coming “nag” lol
All this being said, please don’t attack me :grouphug:

 

[OraLabora]

One of the reasons I broke up with a long term girlfriend before we married was because of this very issue - interpretation of traditional Catholic dogma. She was liberal, whereas I am traditional - it’s that important.

Wow, it’s a good thing you’re not married to a Protestant like I am. If even two people from within one Church can’t get along on doctrine, is there any hope for mankind???

 

[JosephdeMaistre]

I agree, it is very important. I am pretty sure that I could not date someone who insisted on the EF exclusively, not could I date someone who was absolutely against the EF. I prefer the NO, but attend the EF upon occasion (about once a month). I think it is an issue that can be worked through, provided both parties can respect one another.

There are definitely plenty of regular, day-to-day issues that can be worked through. But everyone has their non-negotiable issues, like being pro-life, Catholic, and being a moral individual. But for some folks, the TLM ranks right up there with being Catholic.

 

[The_Scott]

I think what everyone has to remember is that both are equally valid, both are theologically sound, and what it really comes down to is a matter of preference.

I agree.
For example, I believe that the EF is more beautiful and, say, spiritual than the OF. But by no means will I not go to an OF Mass. They are each valid – but my love for Latin perhaps gives me a bias towards the EF.

 

[ConstantineTG]

One of the reasons I broke up with a long term girlfriend before we married was because of this very issue - interpretation of traditional Catholic dogma. She was liberal, whereas I am traditional - it’s that important.

I believe that we should defend our faith against those teachings that are against what the Church teaches, be it liberal thinking or outright heresy. But the point of this thread I believe is that a lot of the argument is happening between people who both follow Church teaching and practice in the manner the Church allows us to practice. The Church gave us two forms of the Roman Missal. So what gives one side the right to say the other side is wrong?

Also, its sad you had to break off with your girlfriend for that reason. You could have been the guide for her to learn more the teachings of the Church. My wife has and is still pretty liberal in her beliefs. I must admit when we first met, I myself was a bit liberal but as my journey in faith has brought me closer in alignment with the teachings of the Church, I make sure that my wife understands why the Church teaches so. I know she’s not fully sold on it, but we’re getting there. I don’t expect her to change overnight. I didn’t. But being with her for the rest of our lives, I know God will give us the graces so that we both at some point in the future be aligned with His teachings.

 

[CWBetts]

I believe that we should defend our faith against those teachings that are against what the Church teaches, be it liberal thinking or outright heresy. But the point of this thread I believe is that a lot of the argument is happening between people who both follow Church teaching and practice in the manner the Church allows us to practice. The Church gave us two forms of the Roman Missal. So what gives one side the right to say the other side is wrong?

Also, its sad you had to break off with your girlfriend for that reason. You could have been the guide for her to learn more the teachings of the Church. My wife has and is still pretty liberal in her beliefs. I must admit when we first met, I myself was a bit liberal but as my journey in faith has brought me closer in alignment with the teachings of the Church, I make sure that my wife understands why the Church teaches so. I know she’s not fully sold on it, but we’re getting there. I don’t expect her to change overnight. I didn’t. But being with her for the rest of our lives, I know God will give us the graces so that we both at some point in the future be aligned with His teachings.

You raise some very good points. We should be open to whoever God places in our lives for us.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You raise some very good points. We should be open to whoever God places in our lives for us.

I guess I am more understanding of her situation because I was in the same boat at one point in our lives. Actually when we met, we were both liberal. But I was already slowly on my way back to the Church. We both come from conservative families though, both our parents are very devout Catholics, so she’s not the extreme kind of liberal. But yes, she believes in things like artifical birth control. Its hard but the reality is no one changes overnight. We just have to thank God that not only we ourselves receive conversion, but we also have the opportunity to convert others. It doesn’t have to be the stranger on the street, it could be one within our family or circle of friends. I know we won’t be married forever, we won’t be husband and wife in heaven. But I still hope that if I make it there, she will be there too.

 

[Timothysis]

I think what everyone has to remember is that both are equally valid, both are theologically sound, and what it really comes down to is a matter of preference.

If only it were that simple. I don’t care if one prefers the EF over the OF; really, I don’t.

 

[floresco]

As a newbie coming into the Faith let me tell you what this tension has done to me.
It has forced me to feel that I need to ‘choose sides’ when in the beginning of my journey of Faith I didn’t realize there was any issues like this.

It is very sad that you were put in this position, Rachel. When I went to the priest for advice about my marriage the first thing he said was to point out that it was not a mixed marriage. We are both Catholics “in good standing”. And I think that same advice applies to this. The starting point for thinking about our differences is what we have in common. We should first recognize each other as loyal, obedient Catholics. Then we can talk about the trad/non-trad controversies.

I hope you will feel able to post more again. I will try to keep a look out for you posts and scare off the meanies.

 

[archangel04]

The EF and the OF are equally valid, going against that would be going against the Church herself. What we must always realize is that the EF has had thousands of years to organically grow, and people for generations have had the opportunity to know and pray the faith with TRUE devotion. Faith isn’t attained in one day, it can take a long time, even for some a lifetime. The OF has only been around a lil over 40 years, and a better understanding of the Mass for the new generations will help push it to the liturgy that God wants it to become. I have never pushed for the elimination of the OF, I grew up and served in it, but I do push for more proper and true catechizes from both the family and the Church. In my humble opinion the OF has the opprotunity to become an even more beutful liturgy then the ED (that’s saying something from my part), but it all must start from our selves, only then will others follow. No point in trying to push reverency and humilty from others to bring to mass when we ourselves don’t bring it.

One of the reasons I broke up with a long term girlfriend before we married was because of this very issue - interpretation of traditional Catholic dogma. She was liberal, whereas I am traditional - it’s that important.

Depends on your view of Liberal if she was against Church teaching that would put her soul in a state of mortal sin than yes you did the right thing.

 

[floresco]

I think what everyone has to remember is that both are equally valid, both are theologically sound, and what it really comes down to is a matter of preference.

I disagree. I do agree that they are both valid, but it does not follow from that it is just a matter of preference. It isn’t just about what we feel or what we like. I think that it is possible to approach this as an objective question and to use reason to determine an answer.

I do not see how we ever could come to agreement on this because we are starting with such different assumptions. While I cannot agree with you, I can still acknowledge you as a good person and a good Catholic. I can say that your position falls within the bounds of orthodoxy. And I can keep in mind the possibility that I am wrong. (Although I do find it difficult to imagine. )

 

[JosephdeMaistre]

Depends on your view of Liberal if she was against Church teaching that would put her soul in a state of mortal sin than yes you did the right thing.

She supported contraception for married couples - I find that women who are more traditionally focused tend to take a more conservative approach to social issues as well, like contraception.

 

[CWBetts]

She supported contraception for married couples - I find that women who are more traditionally focused tend to take a more conservative approach to social issues as well, like contraception.

This is an unfair assumption. I do not consider myself a traditionalist, but at the same time I submit to the authority of the Church. Beig a traditionalist does not make you a better Catholic by default.