Difficulty with certain Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kevin12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
WildCatholic

Pope Benedict XVI allowed for full use of the TLM as a compromise with SSPX,

Jim
Is there a quote by Pope Benedict saying that the TLM is a compromise?:confused:
It would be helpful to see the sourcew for this contention.
May God bless us all. Amen.
 
WildCatholic

Pope Benedict XVI allowed for full use of the TLM as a compromise with SSPX,

Jim
Is there a quote by Pope Benedict saying that the TLM is a compromise?:confused:
It would be helpful to see the source for this contention.
May God bless us all. Amen.
 
But who says it’s ok on this thread? Are you saying that* I *think it’s OK? Have you read my first post on this thread? I don’t think traditionalists should run to these people. I am not with these people, and people from my FSSP parish were not. Why are you insisting that we are all mad anti-Semitic bigots? :mad:

What is the real problem that you have with the EF mass?
I have no problem with the EF at all, because it is a Mass like any other. But when you defend the people on Fish Eaters by saying it is no wonder they do what they do when traditionalists are apparently so persecuted, you are implicitly condoning a behavior that far surpasses in evil whatever abuses there may be in the NO.
 
How would you feel if all these good people you speak of ended up in heaven while you end up in hell out of a misplaced sense of loyalty? Would you feel glad about your decision then? Because there is no reason to believe this is any less likely than the scenario where you all end up in hell. Actually, the only thing you can control is what happens to your soul, so this is what should be concerning you. This is St Leonard’s point. If you want to go to hell you will find an excuse to go there no matter how many graces God offers.

God isn’t asking you to comprehend him, he is asking you to love him. And to love him is to turn away from sin. If you are not ready to turn away from sin, you are not ready to love God, and you are certainly not ready to comprehend him. We are all living in the land of the blind, no one living knows who is in hell or how many will go to hell, including St Leonard when he was alive, which he fully acknowledged in this sermon.

If you find it hard to turn away from sin, and find God incomprehensible, I recommend meditating on the passion of Jesus. I think it will really help you. Jesus must have had the same concern you have for souls in order to give up his life for them. However he did not despair. Thankgoodness.
I wrote out a long response, but I realized there was no point. I guess I just hope that guy was wrong.
 
I have no problem with the EF at all, because it is a Mass like any other. But when you defend the people on Fish Eaters by saying it is no wonder they do what they do when traditionalists are apparently so persecuted, you are implicitly condoning a behavior that far surpasses in evil whatever abuses there may be in the NO.
Oh, no you don’t buddy, you are not going to twist this 😃

Listen. I’m not saying that it is the same thing when people get angry and frustrated and defensive in the traditionalist camp, and when some of them say nasty things about the Jews and fellow Catholics. I keep repeating that most traditionalists are nice and sane people who just like the EF mass. Like me. Some people - the ones you quote, for example - are not representative of the wider traditionalist sentiment. You are desperately trying to make it seem so, but that is not the case. The reason you can’t prove it is because you have never even been to an EF mass, let alone have had an experience of being in a traditionalist parish.

To sum up, this is a very silly argument you are trying to make and I will not participate in it any further. If you are insisting that I am defending anti-Semitism because I sad that many traditionalists feel frustrated and angry about the church and that some go onto the internet and make their feelings public, then you are making things up and I will not stand for it.

God bless ya 👍
 
I keep repeating that most traditionalists are nice and sane people who just like the EF mass. Like me. Some people - the ones you quote, for example - are not representative of the wider traditionalist sentiment. **You are desperately trying to make it seem so, but that is not the case. **The reason you can’t prove it is because you have never even been to an EF mass, let alone have had an experience of being in a traditionalist parish.
That’s quite a spin there, Contra. I invite you to read his words throughout this thread which have no sentiments against “wider traditionalists” as you attempted to prove. I would appreciate your correcting the false picture you tried to paint.

Kevin’s O.P. [Against] those who call people who attend the Novus Ordo mass **Neo-Catholics **
**
  1. [Against] NO is full of abuses - and one of them even considered not preaching about the evils of contraception and homosexuality in every Mass an abuse - and those who attend it are modernists. [Another slurring nickname]
[Against] the deep contempt these people seemed to have towards non-trads, to the extent that it seemed to be a common **bragging point for them to not associate with any non-trads. **
  1. I just want to make it clear that **I do not mean all traditionalists. **
  2. I have no trouble with the EF at all.
  3. I think there are plenty of good traditionalists.
  4. I think that most of the people I read the messages of on Fish Eaters were not SSPX or sede.
 
This is not true. It was JPII who established the FSSP, and the FSSP was made out of priests who left the SSPX. BXVI simply lifted all the restrictions to the EF mass in order to bring back what was our rightful, catholic heritage.

Check the facts Jim, your comment was quite ignorant.
From Cardinal Sean O’Malley’s Blog.
From Cleveland I flew to Rome at the request of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone to participate in a meeting discussing the Holy Father’s Motu Proprio about the use of the older form of the Latin Mass. There were about 25 bishops there, including the president of Ecclesia Dei Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, the prefect of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments Cardinal Francis Arinze, several heads of bishops’ conferences as well as some cardinals and other residential bishops.
They shared with us the Motu Proprio and the Holy Father’s letter explaining it. We also had an opportunity to read the Latin document. We each commented on that, and then the Holy Father came in and shared some of his thoughts with us. The Holy Father is obviously most concerned about trying to bring about reconciliation in the Church. There are about 600,000 Catholics who are participating in the liturgies of the Society of St. Pius X, along with about 400 priests. cardinalseansblog.org/2007/06/29/attending-meetings-in-rome/
Cardinal Sean O’Malley had explained to the media that it was a compromise with SSPX for the full use of the Mass.

I know, that Pope John Paul II allowed for the TLM, when approved by various orders and groups.

However, Pope Benedict XVI removed the restriction and allowed full us, without previously required permission.

Again, it was a compromise to SSPX and trads saw this as opening the door to bring back the TLM as the ordinary format, and we saw the post in this forum and others which
expressed that desire.

FYI, calling a poster ignorant is a violation of CAF rules. 😉

Jim
 
FYI, I have no problem with the TLM, which is the extraordinary format.

This isn’t the issue at all.

The issue is that those so-called traditionalists who have attacked the NO as being watered down and those who attend as being less Catholic than they are.

This has been an issue with anyone experienced in dealing with traditionalist who attend the TLM., I have experience with members of the SSPX going back over 20 years, and they were very nasty, even in a protestant forum where they attacked me for supporting the false Pope John Paul II.

It may not be the majority, I don’t know, I have no experience with the majority, but only those who post in this and other Catholic forums and they are not open and respectful to the majority of Catholics attending the NO in their own parishes.

They have been nasty with Pope Francis, and he has to be a thorn in their side.

Jim
 
That’s quite a spin there, Contra. I invite you to read his words throughout this thread which have no sentiments against “wider traditionalists” as you attempted to prove. I would appreciate your correcting the false picture you tried to paint.

Kevin’s O.P. [Against] those who call people who attend the Novus Ordo mass **Neo-Catholics **
**
  1. [Against] NO is full of abuses - and one of them even considered not preaching about the evils of contraception and homosexuality in every Mass an abuse - and those who attend it are modernists. [Another slurring nickname]
[Against] the deep contempt these people seemed to have towards non-trads, to the extent that it seemed to be a common **bragging point for them to not associate with any non-trads. **
  1. I just want to make it clear that **I do not mean all traditionalists. **
  2. I have no trouble with the EF at all.
  3. I think there are plenty of good traditionalists.
  4. I think that most of the people I read the messages of on Fish Eaters were not SSPX or sede.
Thanks for making this list, but I think the biggest caveat I would add to anything I seem to say about traditionalists is that I mean only traditionalists who are on the net, which I doubt is most or even the majority of them. So I realize I am getting a skewed picture. I don’t think there is any problem with tradition - how could I, since I believe in the Church - or traditionalists, so much as there is with certain traditionalists who like to use the web a lot. It may be that most traditionalists outside the net are like this or are not - at least I hear from most self-identified traditionalists that antisemitism, which I find the most problematic issue, is not a problem for people in the pews, and I have no reason to believe they are lying.

The only other thing is that “modernist” isn’t just a slur, its an accusation of heresy, like calling someone a Jansenist or a Pelagian. Yet, as you said, many net-traditionalists say it as just another insult for those who attend the NO - which is tantamount to saying that the Church is essentially promulgating heresy and has been for half a century.

But in any case, I really think this thread is at risk of turning into open season on traditionalists, and since I think I have already figured out what I need to do (i.e. - ignore those I disagree with), I would rather just let this discussion fall to the wayside.
 
The issue is that those so-called traditionalists who have attacked the NO as being watered down and those who attend as being less Catholic than they are.
It has been relatively recent phenomenon that priests have started voicing their concern about the new mass. I’ve been following Catholic blogs for some 4-5 years now as well as other online Catholic news sources and I have noticed that it is not longer such a taboo to question things that have followed the so-called ‘spirit of V2’, which includes the liturgy. I think we will see more of that, and hopefully this will lead to more clarity about how the mass should be celebrated according to the original plan.

So to say that the mass has been watered down could perhaps be seen as a criticism that can direct us towards improvement: to the way that the new mass ought to be celebrated. (The new English translation, for example, can be seen as a part of this: an improvement and return to the original text.) Because to claim that what we have now in most parishes is what was envisioned during the V2 is simply not true. The problem is that most Catholics don’t know that and feel personally insulted when they encounter such criticism. I used to feel the same way. But then I did some research and went to the old mass and was shocked by what I found.

So yes, I agree with those who think that the mass has indeed been watered down. It is tragic that this has happened. I am under no illusion that the church will return to celebrate the EF exclusively, although that would be my preference. I just hope that one day we will have the NO as it was intended to be celebrated. Is that such a bad thing?

As to the way that this sentiment is expressed, this is a different issue I believe. No group of people is spared pettiness and immaturity, and the way we communicate on the internet can bring out the worst in us.
 
It has been relatively recent phenomenon that priests have started voicing their concern about the new mass. I’ve been following Catholic blogs for some 4-5 years now as well as other online Catholic news sources and I have noticed that it is not longer such a taboo to question things that have followed the so-called ‘spirit of V2’, which includes the liturgy. I think we will see more of that, and hopefully this will lead to more clarity about how the mass should be celebrated according to the original plan.

So to say that the mass has been watered down could perhaps be seen as a criticism that can direct us towards improvement: to the way that the new mass ought to be celebrated. (The new English translation, for example, can be seen as a part of this: an improvement and return to the original text.) Because to claim that what we have now in most parishes is what was envisioned during the V2 is simply not true. The problem is that most Catholics don’t know that and feel personally insulted when they encounter such criticism. I used to feel the same way. But then I did some research and went to the old mass and was shocked by what I found.

So yes, I agree with those who think that the mass has indeed been watered down. It is tragic that this has happened. I am under no illusion that the church will return to celebrate the EF exclusively, although that would be my preference. I just hope that one day we will have the NO as it was intended to be celebrated. Is that such a bad thing?
I wrote and deleted another long reply, but I will just say that whatever the case is with the NO, the obsession of many traditionalists with liturgical purity has not in my mind made them any more Christlike or made the Church more what Christ wanted it to be - I think the opposite is true. I don’t know if is this makes me a Protestant in heart, but the situation sounds like exactly what Jesus said when he spoke of straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel.
 
I wrote and deleted another long reply, but I will just say that whatever the case is with the NO, the obsession of many traditionalists with liturgical purity has not in my mind made them any more Christlike or made the Church more what Christ wanted it to be - I think the opposite is true. I don’t know if is this makes me a Protestant in heart, but the situation sounds like exactly what Jesus said when he spoke of straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel.
Kevin,

lex orandi, lex credendi. The mass is central to our faith. It matters how we celebrate it. This is not a question about purity and aesthetics, but about things that are essential to our faith. Unfortunately, people often see the traditionalist view as one of empty, superficial aesthetics of an elitist group that has a thing for Latin.

If you are open to reading about why this matters, I suggest a wonderful book by Ratzinger called Spirit of the Liturgy. I found it very inspiring and informative. It explains, among other things, how church architecture, music and gestures used during mass have a deep theological meaning, and that we shouldn’t mess with them because the meaning then gets obscured. This book should be read by all Catholics because it is not about pinning the EF against the OF, but about understanding why these things matter, and in doing so it helps us understand the mass better in its complexity (both EF and NO).
 
If you are open to reading about why this matters, I suggest a wonderful book by Ratzinger called Spirit of the Liturgy. I found it very inspiring and informative. It explains, among other things, how church architecture, music and gestures used during mass have a deep theological meaning, and that we shouldn’t mess with them because the meaning then gets obscured. This book should be read by all Catholics because it is not about pinning the EF against the OF, but about understanding why these things matter, and in doing so it helps us understand the mass better in its complexity (both EF and NO).
You make the mistake as many others have done, of putting a Cardinal’s private and personal opinion in the light of an ExCathedra statement. Many clergy have stated that whatever a person opines prior to the papacy does not automatically elevate to the status of ecclesiastical law. It remains, simply, his personal opinion.

It is offensive to imply that the Mass celebrated by the UNIVERSAL Church is not on a par with the Old Tridentine liturgy. This was evident in your few posts, but not surprising, since you are in the same category of all the web trads I have had read … elitist, condescending, and clearly trying to change everyone to your way of thinking.

As Kevin said, it is useless to debate this, since it always winds up the same way –
mad trads will never change their M.O.
 
You make the mistake as many others have done, of putting a Cardinal’s private and personal opinion in the light of an ExCathedra statement. Many clergy have stated that whatever a person opines prior to the papacy does not automatically elevate to the status of ecclesiastical law. It remains, simply, his personal opinion.

This was evident in your few posts, but not surprising, since you are in the same category of all the web trads I have had read … elitist, condescending, and clearly trying to change everyone to your way of thinking.
I have not implied that his book is an ExCathedra statement. It is a good book. That’s all. Maybe the poster that I recommended it to would find it helpful and interesting.

Your personal attack on me is offensive and uncalled for. I am engaging in a discussion on a topic that is important to me. As it happens many people have not been to an EF mass and thus have nothing to base their opinion on, except a few crazies on the FishEaters forum. I think your comment reveals the venom that is directed toward people who prefer the old rite and happen to have an opinion on these things.
 
I have not implied that his book is an ExCathedra statement. It is a good book. That’s all. Maybe the poster that I recommended it to would find it helpful and interesting.

Your personal attack on me is offensive and uncalled for. I am engaging in a discussion on a topic that is important to me. As it happens many people have not been to an EF mass and thus have nothing to base their opinion on, except a few crazies on the FishEaters forum. I just wanted to explain why certain things are seen in a specific way, that is all.
 
I have not implied that his book is an ExCathedra statement. It is a good book. That’s all. Maybe the poster that I recommended it to would find it helpful and interesting
… it is not about pinning the EF against the OF, but about understanding why these things matter.
Your prior post indicates that it is so important to understand these things theologized in Ratzinger’s book, as though the people who celebrate differently than you do in the EF are doin’ it all wrong. Yes, that is elitism. Perhaps after everyone reads the book at your suggestion, you believe they will automatically storm Rome petitioning for a TLM. :rolleyes:
I am engaging in a discussion on a topic that is important to me. As it happens many people have not been to an EF mass and thus have nothing to base their opinion on, except a few crazies on the FishEaters forum. I think your comment reveals the venom that is directed toward people who prefer the old rite and happen to have an opinion on these things.
The venom is directed to the “character” of trads [not the person]. They usually cannot rest with anyone else liking the OF and waste no little time trying to proselytize them. It is wonderful to hold your own opinion, but kindly give the rest of us the privilege to do the same, without being admonished with “lex orandi, lex credendi,” as though we don’t have a clue what worship really should be like. IOW, only the EF has the correct and superior worship, IYHO.

As for not having been to an EF mass, you are entirely mistaken. I was raised with it since my first Holy Communion for about 20 years prior to the OF and I attended it daily in Catholic school. I would never want to go to another one again while I live.

Contrary to Ratzinger’s idealism, I believe the new mass is far superior to the TLM. You should do a poll here to see how many disagree with you.
 
What can I say Sirach2, I’m glad you have been to the EF mass, but I was engaging with another person who has not. So … No need to take it personally.

People are free to think what they like, obviously. But this goes both ways. I should be able to express my stance without being called names. If the thread is about some people who prefer the old rite but are unfortunately very uncharitable towards others, then I feel called to respond because I love the old rite, even though I am appalled by some of the things that one finds on Fish Eaters. I’m not justifying crazy statements, but I want to explain why people get defensive and angry about this. That is all.

*Of course *I would be overjoyed if more people got excited about our wonderful tradition, so suggesting an interesting read is a way of maybe making that happen. If that offends you and bothers you, that is not my problem. 🤷
 
The problem is that most trads have a misunderstanding of parish life, which a pastor has to deal with.

First, a trad will travel out to a parish which hosts a TLM. In fact, the majority of the people attending that Mass, don’t come from that parish, but travel from elsewhere. I saw it in my old parish, which hosted a TLM Mass.

So, they attend this Mass and yes, it’s very reverent.

But the reason has nothing to do with the format of the Mass, for I’ve attended the NO Mass many places where it was very reverent, as compared to my home parish.

The reason for reverence is the people attending.

People who go out of their way to travel to a TLM or travel to a monastery or go on retreats, take their faith at a deeper level than the majority of people back in their home parishes.

The pastor back home, has to deal with people at all different levels of faith, and in particular, he has to reach out to the youth, for they’re the future of the Church.

As a Catholic who grew up with the TLM before Vatican II, I can assure you, the reverence wasn’t there in the final days before the NO became the ordinary. People went to the priest who said the Mass the fastest and kept his homily short. For the post part, Catholics in parishes participated very little other than just sit, stand and kneel when they were suppose to, meanwhile they were either day-dreaming or praying their own prayers. A few followed the missal and read the words they barely understood.

It would be even worse if the TLM became the ordinary today, for back in the 50’s and early 60’s, people still had a sense of respect to keep quite in Mass, movie theaters and town hall meetings. No so today. The attitudes you see today would be brought into the TLM, if it were the ordinary, and it would be a train wreck.

So, enjoy the TLM while you have it, for if it goes as I’ve seen at my old home parish, it’s not going to last.

With all the people traveling in from other parishes, it interfered with the other Mass, which the majority of the members of the parish attended. Also, because of the travel distances of people attending the TLM, having refreshments after Mass as very conducive. However, the parishioners coming in for the other Masses, had no place to park. So, they moved the Mass from 8AM to 1 PM which was after the last scheduled Mass of the parish. With the time change, less people came to the TLM.

The final straw was when the only priest who could say the TLM, was arrested for stealing funds from the Parish and using them to feed his gambling addiction. He had other issues with women and left the priesthood altogether. Being there are no priests trained or willing to say the TLM, there is no Mass in the area and people must travel even further.

Jim
 
Contra Mundum;11134540]What can I say Sirach2, I’m glad you have been to the EF mass, but I was engaging with another person who has not.
Well, if you referring to me, I too grew up with the TLM before Vatican II. I attended many, and would not want to go back.

Also, I’ve attended the NO said in Latin, at the local Benedictine Monastery. I even went out and purchased the Roman Missal so I could follow along. It was beautiful, but a hassle merely mimicking the Latin words, while look across to the other page to see what the words meant. Thankfully, they only celebrated the Mass in Latin, on Thursday. The rest of the week the parts were in Latin, but the rest was in English. They also did the same with the Liturgy of the Hours. After Mass, they went right into Terce, and on Thursday, it was all in Latin.

So, don’t assume that those of use who don’t want to go backwards, are speaking out of ignorance.

Also, I’ve been on the internet for over 25 years and have debated members of SSPX before, when they had rejected all the Pope’s going back to Pius X. It’s in fact how they chose the name, SSPX. They soon changed that when they realized they were wrong about the legitimacy of the elected subsequent popes and now blame others for that stand.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top