I am not a Traditionalist

[Rykell]

JKirkLVNV:

The Pauline Rite hasn’t really had a fair chance, IMHO, because in the “silly season,” there were far too many priests who wanted to stamp their egos on the Mass, who wanted to make it “special” or “relevant,” as if it wasn’t already.

Yes, the silly season is ending, and I really had hope today, that an ineffable sacred liturgy would be the rule as I heard our first mass reading from Isaiah:

1
For Zion’s sake I will not be silent, for Jerusalem’s sake I will not be quiet, Until her vindication shines forth like the dawn and her victory like a burning torch.
2
Nations shall behold your vindication, and all kings your glory; You shall be called by a new name pronounced by the mouth of the LORD.
3
You shall be a glorious crown in the hand of the LORD, a royal diadem held by your God.
4
No more shall men call you “Forsaken,” or your land “Desolate,” But you shall be called “My Delight,” and your land “Espoused.” For the LORD delights in you, and makes your land his spouse.
5
As a young man marries a virgin, your Builder shall marry you; And as a bridegroom rejoices in his bride so shall your God rejoice in you.

 

[palmas85]

No, I don’t believe the traditionalist are anti-Catholic and I don’t think anyone feels this way. That is ridiculous and here in lies the problem between the two fractions. Many assumptions on what each feels the other is thinking. And I’m sorry “you are dangerous because you see Christ and the Church and the Eucharist and the Mass as being truly special” wow that is a loaded statement. Your basically saying your side sees and understands the Mass more than the other side, at least that’s how I read it. And we wonder why there are problems.

Lets not forgot some of the things the other side has been called Palmas, "feminazi, happy clappy (which is demeaning) modernists (which is also an insult) shall I show you all the catty posts on “oh lets all love and kiss and sing kumbaya”

And the thing that gets me about these insults is they apply to just about anyone who is suspect of enjoying the N.O. The assumption seems to be that nearly all NO Masses are rife with abuse, therefore, if you like the NO, you must like the abuses. Poppycock!

Both sides are at fault for not giving the other side the benefit of the doubt.

I’ve been through too many mindless attacks on traditionalists on this forum to think that a large number of the so called progressives think any differently then as I’ve said… I’m just not afraid to say how I see things.

I do agree though that both sides in the issue are at fault.

And I will say this, I haven’t seen any of the truly ridiculous posts about clacking rosary beads driving other worshippers to distraction in a long time so things are getting better, or at least not as non sensical as they have been in the past.

 

[maurin]

So we are hearing a lot about the irreverence of the NO and some about the reverence of the TLM.

What does everyone say about hearing about the motivations behind the actions? Is there anything of substance to talk about?

The point of my OP was motivation. What motivates us? For example what motivates a Holy Priest–and by virtue of the Sacrament of Ordination, the Priesthood is Holy–to abuse the Sacred Liturgy. And what really–I mean really–motivates a young Holy Priest to embrace the TLM? It seems to me, and I could be getting it wrong, that there are a lot of babies being thrown out with the bathwater.

As I stated in a post above, I would much rather surround myself with Traditionalists and Liberals who experience and live the metanoia Jesus preaches in the Gospels rather than with Pharisees and Libertines.

 

[Jedinovice]

I shouldn’t wade in here on this but I will for once. The following is only my THEORY and should not be treated as anything more than hypotehetical conjecture.

Part of this, it seems to me, is actually about personality.
I find those who love ‘Traditional’ forms of liturgy and prayer, who like the Tridentine, tend to be ‘thinking’ types (in Mysers-Briggs parlance.) They are ‘cool headed’ and ‘reasonable.’
As such, expressions of worship with are highly emotive and expressive are disturbing to them. Thinking types prefer, on the whole, quiet, dignified prayer. They also prefer to concentrate on the meaning of the Mass and watch for correct theology more (by instinct) than interpersonal relationship.

The focus is dignified, quiet respect for God almighty, the King to whom we pay respect. When you are before the King (I know, I still live in a constitutional monarchy) you operate with decorum.

Those who love the Pauline Rite, especialy folk or Charasmatic leaning Masses, are more ‘feeling types.’ They are more ‘warm hearted’ and expressive. They enjoy expressions of worship in which they get to show emotion more and in which they interact with other people. They see the sign of peace as an expression of brotherly love while thinking types are more likely to feel it is a distraction from God. Feeling types like less formal worship in which they can feel the Father at the head of the table.

God is worshipped less as King and more as gentle Father. The concentration is more on expressons of family and interpersonal interaction (with God) than theology.

I think, personally, this is OK if understood and one must take into account other people. The Mass, as a uniter of the Catholic family, must steer a tricky middle ground. I think, personally, the Pauline rite does this very well but, alas, is pulled by the two sides to become one or the other. (I think the tridentine is more a thinking types Mass myself.)

The danger, I feel, is for both sides to demand that their way is the only way. I don’t mean that in a liberal sense! I don’t mean “It’s all good man.” I mean that it helps if we recognise that different people do have different ways of naturally worshipping God. The Mass cannot and should not bend to accomodate everyone. It should be a uniter. But, as such, the Mass is always going to be a compromise to different personalities. In a way, because it is a uniter, it is always going to disappoint both sides to a degree. If the Mass is made ‘thinking type’ friendly it will felt as being cold, distant, dispassonate with God elevated to being beyond human interaction to many feeling types. If the Mass is made feeling type friendly it will be seen irreverent, ‘happy clappy’ and leading to doctrinal error.

Therefore, if both sides are unsatisfied, the Mass is correct!!! In a sense… This is why I favour the Tridentine being extended in parishes for those to whom it speaks, but I think the Pauline rite is cool for more feeling types (in so far as it is more feeling friendly than the Tridentine.) But the real issue is how much are we putting our own personal preference forward and saying “This is the only way?” (I’m not talking doctrine here!!! I’m just talking form of prayer.) I do feel both sides unwittingly behave as if everybody is like them. However it runs, I think this is a forgotten variable.

 

[historyb]

in Myers-Briggs parlance I’m an INFP that means I am a feeling person; However am also a convert from Mainline Protestantism and a revert from Extreme Protestantism and I do like the TLM.

Funny thing I never been to one, just seen them from afar. I like the reverence that is in the TLM over most NO I have been to. IMHO when we go to Mass we are in th presence of the King of Kings and the TLM expresses that the best.

 

[Karin]

in Myers-Briggs parlance I’m an INFP that means I am a feeling person; However am also a convert from Mainline Protestantism and a revert from Extreme Protestantism and I do like the TLM.

Funny thing I never been to one, just seen them from afar. I like the reverence that is in the TLM over most NO I have been to. IMHO when we go to Mass we are in th presence of the King of Kings and the TLM expresses that the best.

while I do not totally disagree with you…there are reverent NO masses out there…I attend one…and ALL know that we are in the Presence of the King of Kings!

 

[historyb]

Yes there are and I’m remiss for not mentioning that. In my old parish there were very reverant NO Masses and the Father never tolerated the abuses that some places had. That was my first exposure so I am a bit guilty for holding other parishes to that standard.

In my new parish are very reverant too, the only place I really ever experienced abuse first hand was at a Euchuristic Conference were our Bishop presided. (Dancers all over the place) I just seem to be drawn to the TLM.

 

[Karin]

Yes there are and I’m remiss for not mentioning that. In my old parish there were very reverant NO Masses and the Father never tolerated the abuses that some places had. That was my first exposure so I am a bit guilty for holding other parishes to that standard.

In my new parish are very reverant too, the only place I really ever experienced abuse first hand was at a Euchuristic Conference were our Bishop presided. (Dancers all over the place) I just seem to be drawn to the TLM.

no need to be remiss…I just did not want some posters to get the wrong idea from your post.

 

[anamchara]

I’ve been through too many mindless attacks on traditionalists on this forum to think that a large number of the so called progressives think any differently then as I’ve said… I’m just not afraid to say how I see things.

I do agree though that both sides in the issue are at fault.

And I will say this, I haven’t seen any of the truly ridiculous posts about clacking rosary beads driving other worshippers to distraction in a long time so things are getting better, or at least not as non sensical as they have been in the past.

I understand what your saying, that’s too bad. I’m glad you feel things are getting better

 

[Jedinovice]

in Myers-Briggs parlance I’m an INFP that means I am a feeling person; However am also a convert from Mainline Protestantism and a revert from Extreme Protestantism and I do like the TLM.

Funny thing I never been to one, just seen them from afar. I like the reverence that is in the TLM over most NO I have been to. IMHO when we go to Mass we are in th presence of the King of Kings and the TLM expresses that the best.

I am an INFP too! Obviously I;m making a generalisation but you notice that the attraction is ‘God the King of Kings.’ however, I argue that people ALSO need to experience God as intimate father. This the Pauline rite conveys more easily. So I say it’s a tricky balancing act.

For me, personally, I have difficulty relating to the Tridentine (in fact, even ‘high’ Latin Pauline rite!) because my relationship with God has always been with God as Father. I don’t relate to the emphasis on God as King. (I’m not saying it’s not TRUE, just that I don’t emotionally RELATE to it!)

Thus, I say, there are two elements in the Mass which are both complimentary and contradictory and different people, one the whole, relate to one over the other. Trouble brews when one says “You SHOULD relate in this way in the Mass, period!!!” Yet the Mass must be a place of Uniting, not division. Therefore, given that the Mass should be our point of unification, we should understand and recognise that our bortjers and sisters in the Mass relate to God slightly differently and, thus, we must give allowances in our hearts to their needs.

That’s why I SUPPORT the Tridentine! I think it SHOULD be rolled out. But not to replace the Pauline rite. Those who respond the image of God the King of Kings should, in my opnion, be humble before their brothers who dare to see God as their father - head of the table. Those who see God as Father should be humble before those who see the Heaveninly King, Lord of hosts. In so doing, we place our own preferences in perspective.

 

[netmilsmom]

I’ve been through too many mindless attacks on traditionalists on this forum to think that a large number of the so called progressives think any differently then as I’ve said… I’m just not afraid to say how I see thing.

Amen.
And when the progressives come in, not knowing the GIRM, forgetting about the RS, having feelings override Vatican documents etc. and we have to constantly start from the beginning with them, it can get frustrating.

Start another handholding thread and they all do the pile on. What I love is when someone new asks, is this okay and when we start to explain why it isn’t, a poster will come in with, “We’ve heard this all before.”

Well they are right, we have, but apparently the OP hasn’t. Direct them to the old threads and help them out. This is what we are all about.

 

[Karin]

Amen.
And when the progressives come in, not knowing the GIRM, forgetting about the RS, having feelings override Vatican documents etc. and we have to constantly start from the beginning with them, it can get frustrating.

Start another handholding thread and they all do the pile on. What I love is when someone new asks, is this okay and when we start to explain why it isn’t, a poster will come in with, “We’ve heard this all before.”

Well they are right, we have, but apparently the OP hasn’t. Direct them to the old threads and help them out. This is what we are all about.

while I agree with the general sentiment of your post and palmas post also…I do think that we should be careful in labeling our fellow posters…

this is just my humble opinion though

 

[netmilsmom]

while I agree with the general sentiment of your post and palmas post also…I do think that we should be careful in labeling our fellow posters…

this is just my humble opinion though

I don’t think of it as a label, I think of it as a Classification.

I don’t want to be lumped in with the people from the Catholic Community up the street.

I am Catholic, A#1
When they start pulling in ideas from the Lutheran church up the street, it blurs the lines.
They do it, I didn’t make them, so if I need to call myself a traditionalist to make that clear, no problem.

I try to avoid “orthodox” because of what the opposite is not a nice thing to call someone. I really feel that most Catholics on that side of the scale have their hearts in the right place, they just don’t know any better.

 

[maurin]

So we are hearing a lot about the irreverence of the NO and some about the reverence of the TLM.

What does everyone say about hearing about the motivations behind the actions? Is there anything of substance to talk about?

The point of my OP was motivation. What motivates us? For example what motivates a Holy Priest–and by virtue of the Sacrament of Ordination, the Priesthood is Holy–to abuse the Sacred Liturgy. And what really–I mean really–motivates a young Holy Priest to embrace the TLM? It seems to me, and I could be getting it wrong, that there are a lot of babies being thrown out with the bathwater.

As I stated in a post above, I would much rather surround myself with Traditionalists and Liberals who experience and live the metanoia Jesus preaches in the Gospels rather than with Pharisees and Libertines.

Anyone care to respond?

 

[Karin]

I don’t think of it as a label, I think of it as a Classification.

I don’t want to be lumped in with the people from the Catholic Community up the street.

I am Catholic, A#1
When they start pulling in ideas from the Lutheran church up the street, it blurs the lines.
They do it, I didn’t make them, so if I need to call myself a traditionalist to make that clear, no problem.

I try to avoid “orthodox” because of what the opposite is not a nice thing to call someone. I really feel that most Catholics on that side of the scale have their hearts in the right place, they just don’t know any better.

thanks for the clarification… …
still agree with the general sentiment…but that is just my opinion

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Anyone care to respond?

I go back to what I said before: in the “silly season,” priests seem to feel that they had to put their personal mark or “stamp” on the Mass, to give it a flavor that was distinctly “them.” That has lead to liturgical chaos. Out of chaos, there nearly always comes the desire for order; hence, the younger generation determining to offer the Mass correctly.

 

[paramedicgirl]

thanks for the clarification… …
still agree with the general sentiment…but that is just my opinion

You know our opinions are considered small around here, don’t you?

 

[brotherhrolf]

One of the problems I see is that there is a gap between those of us who remember the TLM of our childhood and those who have come after. Everyone seems to think that the “new springtime of the Church” was a welcome thing, that Catholics were tired of the silence, tired of hearing rosary beads clacking, no one understood Latin, etc…all the usual shibboleths. What is not understood is that there were a great many of us who were absolutely appalled by what happened. Myself included.

Let me share something with you. In 1965, the Mass was still in Latin. By 1969 we had switched to the NO. I’ll not go into great detail but it disturbed me to the very core of my being that we sang Simon and Garfunkle’s “Bridge over Troubled Waters” and " Hello Darkness" at my graduation Mass from a Catholic High School. In four short years we went from singing Tantum Ergo to such classics as the now non-pc “Sons of God”, “They’ll Know We are Christians”, “Here I am Lord” and so on and so on.

We went from choir and organ to guitar. From absolute reverence to swaying, and grinning, and a strumming. I was aghast! I would try to find the earliest Mass I could attend to avoid what was going on. In 1970 we still received communion kneeling down…then came the change to removal of the communion rails and reception in the hand. I could not take it. And so, for some six years I simply did not attend Mass. I did not join another church, I simply placed my soul in jeopardy. I don’t think I was the only one.

When I moved up here to go to grad school, by word of mouth, I found that the cathedral parish was noted for its reverence. My then fiance and I began attending. It was the NO but it was reverent and, at that time, still maintained some pre-V II rites such as the Asperges Me (in Latin) before Mass started. There was a plaque in the cathedral which stated:

The Lord is in His holy temple; let all the earth keep silent before Him. Habakuk 2:20

And they did and for the most part today, still do.

I wouldn’t call myself a strict traditionalist. I love my parish and drive 25 miles to attend. We have a very reverent NO. What I have discovered recently through these forums and in particular watching the TLMs and the abused NOs on YouTube, etc. is that I find that there is a missing element for me today. I’m at a loss to explain it. The closest I can come to capturing my feelings is that with the TLM I entered into the presence of God in a way that I cannot with the NO. I don’t know exactly how to explain it to you.

Father has asked me if I would be willing to sing in a Gregorian choir. If the universal indult is issued and if we are able to have a TLM at the cathedral, I feel strongly called. I’m not a knuckle dragger…I loved the Church of my youth and wish that everyone could have experienced it. I think my friend Palmas feels the same way since he and I are of an age and we lived in the same city. We simply don’t have adequate points of reference.

For the record, I am INTJ. Oh, yeah, too, I have never received Our Lord in my hand either.

 

[Karin]

You know our opinions are considered small around here, don’t you?

you could be right…but that is just my humble opinion on the matter.

 

[paramedicgirl]

you could be right…but that is just my humble opinion on the matter.

Do you think there is a smaller font to match the weight of our opinions?