Does Being A Traditionalist Sometimes Make You Feel Isolated?

[mick321]

Are you this offensive in real life? The “fact of the matter is” VERY traditionally-minded Catholics can have a great love for the Mass of Pope Pius VI. They might even prefer the OF to the EF.

Your “modernist” slur gives insight into why some reject “traditionalism.” Some use the behavior of people like you to stereotype the entire community. No wonder why some EF Masses have so few attendees.

Why?

 

[ChurchTorch]

Why?

It’s wrong for someone to refer to another person as a “modernist” simply because they prefer the OF. “Modernism” has a very specific meaning within the Church and preferring the OF does not fit it in any way.

 

[Lormar]

Yes, I’d like to know why too.

Preference for the TLM does not a traditional Catholic make.

 

[Onegin]

This raises an interesting question: What is a “traditionally-minded” Catholic? What is a “traditionalist?” What is an “orthodox” Catholic? I hear these terms used frequently around here but they can mean anything.

Personally:

I know Catholics who call themselves “very orthodox” or “very conservative” but are involved in charismatic congregations. They may not know about or attend the TLM but they use the term to denote that they agree with the Magisterium on all the “controversial” issues and most often will integrate that into a conservative political mindset as well.

When I hear “traditionally-minded” I think of someone who doesn’t really have a preference for one form over the other and may or may not attend the TLM but probably isn’t too fond of charismatic Catholicism or any of the progressive movements.

The world “traditionalist” to me, however, denotes someone who basically attends the TLM exclusively where possible, holds at least some reservations about the Vatican II documents/practices and has an interest in pre-Vatican II practices and traditions.

Fell free to correct me, but that’s kind of where my initial ‘instinct’ is when I hear the terms.

 

[Malleus_01]

Are you this offensive in real life? The “fact of the matter is” VERY traditionally-minded Catholics can have a great love for the Mass of Pope Pius VI. They might even prefer the OF to the EF.

Your “modernist” slur gives insight into why some reject “traditionalism.” Some use the behavior of people like you to stereotype the entire community. No wonder why some EF Masses have so few attendees.

Malleus: First of all - are you always this offensive to Traditional Catholics in person or is this the EXCEPTION to the rule today for you. The FACT of the matter is - the subject never has been to compare one to the other. What did Dempsey just say? I didnt ask you to sell me on the merits of the OF - we obviously disagree or I would attend one. Many do. Since when has this ever been the issue here. The subject is - Why are Traditional Catholics being made to feel isolated when the OF and EF are both celebrated in a parish. It seems that many who go to the OF think that the EF is merely allowed so they can evangelize them into the OF. Sorry , But I dont share that view. Read some of the posts here. Its obvious. We dont care if you prefer the OF. When have I said anything about it.

Malleus: As for the term “Modernist” being a slur - I disagree. Vatican II was designed for modernization was it not? It said as much. And as for the EF Masses not having good attendance - thats a ridiculous notion. The Church used the Tridentine Latin Rite for over 1600 years and it didnt fade into history - it flourished. In the 40 years of the Pauline Mass we have multiple Closures and Church Consolidations and declining parishioners and vocations globally alarming the Pope to the point of him once again turning back to the Tridentine Latin Rites to bolster the Church. So save it - your opinions are not serving the focus or spirit of the forum - they are purposely being divisive. I wont be a party to any further attempts to bait me into a OF verses EF debate or obviously uncharitable comments meant only to elicit a response in kind. . That isnt being discussed here.

 

[Malleus_01]

This raises an interesting question: What is a “traditionally-minded” Catholic? What is a “traditionalist?” What is an “orthodox” Catholic? I hear these terms used frequently around here but they can mean anything.

Personally:

I know Catholics who call themselves “very orthodox” or “very conservative” but are involved in charismatic congregations. They may not know about or attend the TLM but they use the term to denote that they agree with the Magisterium on all the “controversial” issues and most often will integrate that into a conservative political mindset as well.

When I hear “traditionally-minded” I think of someone who doesn’t really have a preference for one form over the other and may or may not attend the TLM but probably isn’t too fond of charismatic Catholicism or any of the progressive movements.

The world “traditionalist” to me, however, denotes someone who basically attends the TLM exclusively where possible, holds at least some reservations about the Vatican II documents/practices and has an interest in pre-Vatican II practices and traditions.

Fell free to correct me, but that’s kind of where my initial ‘instinct’ is when I hear the terms.

Malleus : The “Traditionalist” label offends me. I rarely make an issue of it. I certainly wasnt a “Traditionalist” when I was Baptised in 1956. I was a Catholic then. And I am a Catholic now. Catholic is good enough for me. And as for how good a Catholic the next guy is - thats between the Lord and Him or Her. The distinctions are made by those who wish to be divisive. Now if the “differences” are being discussed as part of the subject matter - then of course - for clarity these terms are often used to denote the differences in practise if not belief. But as we have just seen - some people automatically take offense and then comes the back and forth. But that offense isnt a one way street if the intention from the outset was to slight and thus create a controversy to begin with.

Ultimately - each Catholic who comes here should come here for charities sake and for no other. I try to give the view point from Catholicism as held and practised Pre Vatican II. If that deserves a label - then I am certain there are those who will come up with one. And on the other end of the scale - we have Catholics who want to dismantle everything about the Church as it is today and we all know some like that as well.

Pax

 

[CradleCath]

Do you think lay ministeries increase the level of fellowship among OF Catholics?

In the EF, lay members can either sing in the choir or the men/boys can serve at Mass. The priest is the most important figure and performs all of the actions involved in the Sacrifice. **However, in the OF, lay persons often performs the roles previously performed by priests, for example, they distribute communion. **I am not saying that the EF Mass should permit lay readers or lay EMHC’s. I just think that the people involved in these ministries have more opportunity to attend parish meetings etc. Do you agree?

Oh Geez, you hit upon one of my pet peeves. I’m really going to try to discuss this is a quiet & kind manner, though.

First of all, yes, I do think that the Lay Ministries interest a **certain kind **of people & I think, keep them coming to Mass . They are the type that likes to be in the thick of things & the type who likes an “up-front where people can see me” position. I also think that the lay ministers, who perform duties during the Mass have done a great deal of harm to the Priesthood. I think that they have had a disastrous effect on vocations to the priesthood. Why bother to beome a priest? The laity can hand out the Eucharist at the NO. Mass, say the Epistle, the Deacons…with no eye toward the priesthood…can even read the Gospel. That pretty much did it for me. Receiving the Eucharist from my second cousin who is the biggest gossip in town was the trigger, but deacons taking over the roles that should belong to the priest was the final straw. (BTW., I’ve been asked 3 times to be an EEM & refused each time. That is the duty & honor that the priest deserves to perform.)

In the Latin Catholic Church, the offices of lector & deacon, in this sense, was formerly classed as one of the four minor orders and in recent centuries was generally conferred only on those preparing for ordination to the priesthood.

[SIGN][Five years AFTER the council ended this went into effect: from 1 January 1973, the apostolic letter Ministeria quaedam of 15 August 1972 decreed instead that:

**What up to now were called minor orders **are henceforth to be called ministries. ** In other words the roles, many of them totally unnecessary, that were once filled by seminarians…were now going to members of the laity.

ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2006/05/opus-dei-bishop-robert-finn-cleans.html[/SIGN]

We had a terrible mess in my diocese until our new Bishop Finn arrived. We had members of the laity, who really ran things just like the hangers on of the old political bosses…Jim Curley, in the KC. area it was the Pendergrast family…When our Bishop took charge of the diocese, he cleaned house:

After taking over in late May, Finn:

Replaced the leadership team of his predecessor, Bishop Raymond J. Boland.
**More than halved the diocese’s funding of a longstanding center that trained Catholic laypersons to help in their parishes. **
Stopped publishing the column of a theologian ??? Father “Richard is the camera rolling McBrien” who is often at odds with the Vatican, a move that caused an outcry from some readers of the diocesan newspaper.
Although Finn still is getting a feel for his new position, he is definite about his love for the church and his trust in its teachings.
He thinks the church should take a stand against the prevailing culture:

Not only is everyone’s viewpoint seen as valuable, which Finn accepts, but “every person’s claim on truth is regarded as equally valid,” which he said is not true. The church has the duty to pass on certain lasting truths, he said.
“We have to be unafraid to announce the gospel without compromise and teach what the church teaches without compromise,” Finn said.

There are so many ways that people can help in their parish, but MANY find serving food to the poor & the addicted to be menial & beneath them, they won’t volunteer to help clean the Church for Easter, to count the money in the collection plate, yet are just VERY happy to serve on the altar. That makes one wonder just how much good they do the parish.It also has much to do with some of the fear of the TLM. They like being lectors & readers & EM’s. If they went to the TLM. they could no longer be priestettes & “play priests”.

 

[malphono]

In the Latin Catholic Church, the offices of lector & deacon, in this sense, was formerly classed as one of the four minor orders and in recent centuries was generally conferred only on those preparing for ordination to the priesthood.

I mean no offense, but if I may, I’ll offer a small point of clarification: the order of Deacon is, and has always been, a Major Order. That is true in the Roman Church, as well as in all of the East and Orient. The order of Lector, OTOH, was a Minor Order in the Roman Church. (It still is in most of the East and Orient.) The order of Subdeacon was, in the West, formerly considered a Major Order, but never so in the East and Orient, where it was, and remains, a Minor Order

 

[Bennett_Mariae]

Many thanks to the recent posters here for totally ruining this thread.
The initial questions asked was a worthy one.
The last several pages of ‘discussion’ are not.

 

[Timothysis]

ChurchTorch;6403081:

#1. That post is by “call me Tim” & his fear of the Latin Mass caused me to mostly ignore his posts over the past year.

If you can show me once instance of “fear” of the Latin mass, then I will eat my hat.

#3. Were you & “call me Tim” adults when the Novus Ordo replaced the Mass of the ages, the Mass of the Roman Catholic Church from 400Ad to 1969.

The Mass of the ages? Is this a title that the Church has ever used or is it just “unsubstantiated remarks” with “no proof?”

It was called the Novus Ordo at that time, is still called the Novus Ordo Mass & why do you care. There is nothing wrong with the title. And by the way, please provide proof the the Tridentine Mass was EVER called the “Novus Ordo”.

I never maintained that the Tridentine Mass was ever called the “Novus Ordo.” I said that each new edition of the Roman Missal is technically a novus ordo, whether it be the Tridentine Missal or Pope Paul VI’s missal. Novus ordo is not a particular title but a phrase that denotes a new edition. Your use of the phrase “novus ordo” is as a pejorative.

Interestingly enough, Pope Pius V himself, in Quo Primum called the Mass according to the Tridentine Missal a "New Rite," meaning that he considered it something different than what went before. Weird, huh?

In any event, this penchant for calling the OF the “Novus Ordo” is something from which people like you will never be dissuaded.

One last thing. Why do you do you people, who say that our Mass is not worth considering hang around the Traditional Forum so much?

Because there are many decent OF participants who consider themselves Traditional Catholics. The phrase Traditional Catholic is not the property of the likes of you to withhold because we don’t satisfy your idea of being Catholic.

Why are you on this thread whose subject matter concerns whether we “Trads” feel isolated at times. How would you know??I wish the moderators would consider a forum titled the Novus Ordo forum. I doubt that most of you would stay there, though.

Funny, because I suggested to a moderator that the Traditional Catholicism forum should be retitled the “Ultra Far Right Pre-Vatican II Catholicism Forum,” as it more accurately reflects the thoughts and opinions of people as yourself.

 

[Timothysis]

This is the second or third post in which you’ve referred to Post #107, as if it is the stone that contained the ten Commandments,

[SIGN]Following is most of post #107:
The term “Novus Ordo” is not an official title of anything. Every new edition of the missal is a “novus ordo,” meaning literally the “new order” of how the missal is celebrated.[/SIGN]

Lets see…do I find a link here? One that states that the Novus Ordo is not the official title of the New Order of the Mass?? Why no, I don’t. And, it almost seems as if “Call me Tim”, thinks that every newly published missal, contains a New Order of the Mass.(Let’s see, there is the St. Joseph’s missal, the missal I have from Angelus Press, the Baronius Missal & on & on. Guess what, they all contain the same Mass.

[SIGN][SIGN}The rest of post #107:Every time the Tridentine missal was revised (and yes, it was revised several times) the new missal became, technically, the “novus ordo,” the "new order of the Mass. [/SIGN][/SIGN]

About the later revisions of the Mass of Trent…Pope Pius V himself added to the Missal the feast of Our Lady of Victory, to celebrate the victory of Lepanto of 7 October 1571. His immediate successor, Pope Gregory XIII, changed the name of this feast to “The Most Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary” and Pope John XXIII changed it to “Our Lady of the Rosary”.

These additions of feast days hardly constitute a Novus Ordo. Now, if either you or “call me Tim” can show, me with a link, that the Tridentine Mass has ever been called the “New Order of the Tridentine Mass”…maybe I can stop laughing. Until then :extrahappy::extrahappy:

[SIGN]Those who use the phrase “Novus Ordo” are using it as a derisive term for those who prefer the Ordinary Form. As the poster above stated, the Church has NEVER referred to the Mass as celebrated by the Missal of Pope Paul VI as the “Novus Ordo.” [/SIGN]

You are hilarious. Type Novus Ordo Missae, or Mass into your search engine & see how many hits you come up with.

“In advance of the 1969 decision on the form of the revision of the liturgy, a preliminary draft of two sections of the Roman Missal was published. The section containing the unvarying part of the Mass had the Latin title Ordo Missae (Ordinary of the Mass),[45] the same title that the equivalent section had in previous editions of the Missal. It was unremarkably referred to as the “novus Ordo Missae” — “the new Ordinary of the Mass”, “novus” being the Latin for “new” (see, for example, this speech by Pope Paul VI). “Novus Ordo Missae”, or simply “Novus Ordo”, later became a specific composite term used to refer to the revised rite of Mass in its entirety. Traditionalist Catholics often use it in a pejorative manner, and sometimes employ it as a blanket condemnatory term for the present-day Church (“the Novus Ordo Church”). For this reason, some mainstream Catholics reject the term, though others are content to use it. The term “Novus Ordo” is not used in official Church documents or by academic liturgists.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo#Names_used_for_the_Mass_of_Paul_VI

You really should refrain from posting about topics that you obviously do not understand.

 

[yoopersenior]

It all really depends on the parish. In the Archdiocese of Chicago, where I reside, I could easily think of 5 parishes where the TLM would go over well, because the parishoners are already very traditionally minded. I could think of a great many more where it would not be received well, because the parish in question is ultra-liberal. In the case of the latter, it’s not the Latin Mass per se that offends parishoners, but rather the Traditional Catholic beliefs of those who would attend it.

                              The negative comments I've heard at Latin Mass coffee hours tend to be along the lines of. Church A seems to only have altar girls and women readers, Church B Had people handing out literature for a pro-abortion candidate on there property, Church C is going to have a contingent in the Gay Pride Parade. Not pleasant topics, but not things that go away if you ignore them either.

Since you are in the Archdiocese of Chicago…have you been to St. John Cantius Church?
Very traditional, Latin Mass and a beautiful Church.

 

[ChurchTorch]

This raises an interesting question: What is a “traditionally-minded” Catholic? What is a “traditionalist?” What is an “orthodox” Catholic? I hear these terms used frequently around here but they can mean anything.

Personally:

I know Catholics who call themselves “very orthodox” or “very conservative” but are involved in charismatic congregations. They may not know about or attend the TLM but they use the term to denote that they agree with the Magisterium on all the “controversial” issues and most often will integrate that into a conservative political mindset as well.

When I hear “traditionally-minded” I think of someone who doesn’t really have a preference for one form over the other and may or may not attend the TLM but probably isn’t too fond of charismatic Catholicism or any of the progressive movements.

The world “traditionalist” to me, however, denotes someone who basically attends the TLM exclusively where possible, holds at least some reservations about the Vatican II documents/practices and has an interest in pre-Vatican II practices and traditions.

Fell free to correct me, but that’s kind of where my initial ‘instinct’ is when I hear the terms.

One is easy. An “orthodox Catholic” is one that follows what the Church actually directs. They have a great deal to licitly choose from but as long as their choices are allowed by the Church, they are orthodox Catholics. I personally would add that it defines someone who does not attack that which they do not personally like IF it is approved by the Church.

“Traditionalism” is not defined. It’s all over the place. Within the context of these discussions it can range from the near-sedevacantists you run into over at fisheaters all the way to those who simply value solemnity in the praise and worship of Jesus Christ and a ton of others in between.

 

[ChurchTorch]

CradleCath;6403713:

If you can show me once instance of “fear” of the Latin mass, then I will eat my hat.

The Mass of the ages? Is this a title that the Church has ever used or is it just “unsubstantiated remarks” with “no proof?”

I never maintained that the Tridentine Mass was ever called the “Novus Ordo.” I said that each new edition of the Roman Missal is technically a novus ordo

, whether it be the Tridentine Missal or Pope Paul VI’s missal. Novus ordo is not a particular title but a phrase that denotes a new edition. Your use of the phrase “novus ordo” is as a pejorative.

Interestingly enough, Pope Pius V himself, in Quo Primum called the Mass according to the Tridentine Missal a "New Rite," meaning that he considered it something different than what went before. Weird, huh?

In any event, this penchant for calling the OF the “Novus Ordo” is something from which people like you will never be dissuaded.

Because there are many decent OF participants who consider themselves Traditional Catholics. The phrase Traditional Catholic is not the property of the likes of you to withhold because we don’t satisfy your idea of being Catholic.

Funny, because I suggested to a moderator that the Traditional Catholicism forum should be retitled the “Ultra Far Right Pre-Vatican II Catholicism Forum,” as it more accurately reflects the thoughts and opinions of people as yourself.

Another awesome posting…

 

[ChurchTorch]

…If the term “Novus Ordo” was good enough for Pope Paul VI, it’s good enough for me.
Quit trying to stir up controversy where there isn’t any. Thanks!

Get over it already. The only time the term was used by the Church with respect to the Mass of Pope Pius VI was: "a preliminary draft of two sections of the Roman Missal was published. The section containing the unvarying part of the Mass had the Latin title Ordo Missae (Ordinary of the Mass), the same title that the equivalent section had in previous editions of the Missal.

It’s amazing how some latch onto that arcane bit of knowledge so that they can use it to offend others.

Ordinary Form of the Mass and **Extraordinary Form of the Mass ** were coined by our CURRENT POPE in part to get away from some of the pejorative nicknames like “Novus Ordo” and “NO” Mass. So get with the program and accept Pope Benedict XVI’s wisdom by following his guidance by ceasing to use a label that many find offensive.

 

[ChurchTorch]

Malleus: First of all - are you always this offensive to Traditional Catholics in person or is this the EXCEPTION to the rule today for you. The FACT of the matter is - the subject never has been to compare one to the other. What did Dempsey just say? I didnt ask you to sell me on the merits of the OF - we obviously disagree or I would attend one. Many do. Since when has this ever been the issue here. The subject is - Why are Traditional Catholics being made to feel isolated when the OF and EF are both celebrated in a parish. It seems that many who go to the OF think that the EF is merely allowed so they can evangelize them into the OF. Sorry , But I dont share that view. Read some of the posts here. Its obvious. We dont care if you prefer the OF. When have I said anything about it.

I don’t think they are. But the real issue is that it’s not the question asked in the title of this thread. Read it again. “Does Being A Traditionalist Sometimes Make You Feel Isolated?” Are you able to see the difference?

As far as modernism, please review the modernism heresy in the Church and then we can tackle that.

 

[Like]

Get over it already. The only time the term was used by the Church with respect to the Mass of Pope Pius VI was: "a preliminary draft of two sections of the Roman Missal was published. The section containing the unvarying part of the Mass had the Latin title Ordo Missae (Ordinary of the Mass), the same title that the equivalent section had in previous editions of the Missal.

It’s amazing how some latch onto that arcane bit of knowledge so that they can use it to offend others.

Ordinary Form of the Mass and **Extraordinary Form of the Mass ** were coined by our CURRENT POPE in part to get away from some of the pejorative nicknames like “Novus Ordo” and “NO” Mass. So get with the program and accept Pope Benedict XVI’s wisdom by following his guidance by ceasing to use a label that many find offensive.

Torchy, This is at least the 4th time you’ve used the name of Pope Pius VI, who are you referring to???

Why don’t you get over yourself on the use of NO??? It’s not a bad term!

 

[Onegin]

Get over it already. The only time the term was used by the Church with respect to the Mass of Pope Pius VI was: "a preliminary draft of two sections of the Roman Missal was published. The section containing the unvarying part of the Mass had the Latin title Ordo Missae (Ordinary of the Mass), the same title that the equivalent section had in previous editions of the Missal.

It’s amazing how some latch onto that arcane bit of knowledge so that they can use it to offend others.

Ordinary Form of the Mass and **Extraordinary Form of the Mass ** were coined by our CURRENT POPE in part to get away from some of the pejorative nicknames like “Novus Ordo” and “NO” Mass. So get with the program and accept Pope Benedict XVI’s wisdom by following his guidance by ceasing to use a label that many find offensive.

I gave one example to rebut the argument that Rome has “NEVER” used that term and now you are nitpicking with me that it hasn’t been used enough? How many times does the Pope need to call the Mass the Novus Ordo before it’s okay for the rest of us to use?

No need to be so caustic about it. Novus Ordo is not an offensive term as the Pope himself has used it so I can’t help that people are erroneously offended. Some people are offended with the use of the word “traditionalist” and that word has no more objectively bad connotations than “Novus Ordo”.

Also, Pope Benedict XVI has never indicated that the term “EF” and “OF” are to be used exclusively, nor did he indicate that the term “Novus Ordo” is pejorative or offensive as you claim. Methinks you read too much into his statements.

 

[Timothysis]

I gave one example to rebut the argument that Rome has “NEVER” used that term and now you are nitpicking with me that it hasn’t been used enough? How many times does the Pope need to call the Mass the Novus Ordo before it’s okay for the rest of us to use?

Just one or two examples from you would be nice.

 

[Onegin]

Just one or two examples from you would be nice.

On the previous page I gave an example and a link to a Vatican document where Pope Paul VI refers to the “Novus Ordo Missae” several times. I don’t have the time or patience to search through all of the Vatican archives in Latin to find every instance that it has been used. Perhaps someone else does.

My point is that it rebuts the claim that Rome has never used the term. It also rebuts the claim that “Novus Ordo” is somehow a derogatory term made up by crazy traditionalists who hate the OF.