N
netmilsmom
Guest
Your link isn’t working.
- Status
K
Karin
Guest
the link does not work.
T
TNT
Guest
** I rode that horse to, so welcome, welcome! **mdstanzel
The Link problem was that the right “)” got capured as part of the link.
Here, try this:
**makephpbb.com/phpbb/index.php?mforum=members
**
Q
QuietTimes
Guest
ME TOO!!
I feel the same way exactly, but you put it so nicely. I felt as if you were writing about me, the only difference is I was born in 76.
Q
QuietTimes
Guest
See,
I learn something new everyday.
I learn something new everyday.
T
TNT
Guest
"The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists." * – Pope St. Pius X*Windmill said:
J
Jedinovice
Guest
Yes, you’ve slightly misunderstood my point - though that does not suppose me. We’re actually sating the same thing. I agree that love is often f the will(though emotion is actually required in perfect love!! If we act by the will without love it is meaningless, as Paul makes very clear! But if you work with the will the emotions follow. But that’s a side track.)
My point was actually that people have a NATURAL inclination to a different form of relationship with God and this affects what they feel comfortable with in Mass. I am definitely NOT saying that we should ‘choose the Mass’ according to our feelings. In fact, I’m saying the reverse! We must be aware that our experience is not the same experience as everyone else. People are not like us. What makes us comfortable is not what makes someone else comfortable.
What bothers me in these discussions is the assumption that is the mass was XYZ, everyone would be devoted, reverent, comfortable, at peace, etc, etc. Fact is that the Mass is never going to be what everyone wants of it. But trying to find the balance the Mass is going to have a degree of discomfort for everyone. So, out of love for others, we should swallow our preferences and accept that some things we find irritating in Mass speak to others. (I’m not talking theology here! I’m talking about style!)
Too many people, I reckon, are imposing their expectations on others so they feel comfortable. I say, give a little for others and use a degree of will to endure for love of your brothers. Too much ‘theology’ is talked in relation to what is actually preference relating to personality. Some people “Feel in the presence of the Lord” in the TLM and not in the NO. What they can’t grasp is that others will not have that experience in the Latin but actually in Pauline rite. I speak from experience. I’ve attended high Latin Masses. I felt totally isolated, cut off from God by al the finery and incense and formality! But I went through with my will and I could those around me were LOVING it!! They felt totally at home. Fine, fair enough. But a simple, vernacular Mass does me. There I experience God, in the simple, in the ‘one to one’ with God, in the ‘mundane’ in a sense. But I don’t seek to impose my preference upon others in the Mass. Instead, the Mass must unite us. To do that requires both sets of needs being addressed which requires will on both sides.
I find the Midnight Latin Masses very hard though and avoid them where I can. If I can’t, I offer my will to God.
So I actually agree with you - I think!
C
Catholic_Dad
Guest
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
Greetings! May the peace of the Lord be with you always!
I am new to this part of the CA forums. I spend most of my time in the Eastern Christian battleground.
Let me say, first of all, that I am inspired by the obvious love that you all have for not only our Lord but His Church. You all are very passionate people and that is absolutely how we should respond to our Lord and Savior - with passion. Thank you for your witness.
I am a convert. I became Catholic in 1993. I was raised in no faith tradition so all I have ever known is the NO Mass. I have been to many NO Masses in many parishes and have experienced incredible reverence and incredible irreverence. At one point in my journey the irreverence I experienced caused me to stop attending Mass and seriously consider becoming Eastern Orthodox. I started attending an Orthodox parish where the Divine Liturgy was just incredible. I could literally feel the presence of the saints. I was this close (holding index finger and thumb a 1/4 inch apart) from becoming Orthodox and probably would have had the priest not left the parish. I came to the conclusion that becoming Orthodox was not God’s will for my life.
I came hesitatingly back to my local parish. I left because of the “abuses” I had seen and knew what I would be facing. Could I handle it and remain faithful? Well, the “abuses” weren’t as bad or as numerous as I remembered. I’m not saying things are perfect because they aren’t perfect - I’m just not on heresy or abuse watch anymore. Trust me, I’m no namby pamby, everything is okay, Catholic. I used to get torked out of control about things that weren’t “right” in not only my parish but also in the Church as a whole. However, other things have become more important, or least equally important, to me as pristine liturgy. Some of those things are being able to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, worshipping as a family, the fact that my local parish is also my community (brothers and sisters that I see on a daily basis who I have a relationship with beyond our time at church on Sunday), etc.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that, as I travel my journey, my focus has shifted from my own propensity to be a liturgical cop to one who seeks to embrace the good and beautiful where I can find it. And, I have found that my own, local, parish isn’t so full of abuses as I once thought.
Peace,
Rob
Greetings! May the peace of the Lord be with you always!
I am new to this part of the CA forums. I spend most of my time in the Eastern Christian battleground.
Let me say, first of all, that I am inspired by the obvious love that you all have for not only our Lord but His Church. You all are very passionate people and that is absolutely how we should respond to our Lord and Savior - with passion. Thank you for your witness.
I am a convert. I became Catholic in 1993. I was raised in no faith tradition so all I have ever known is the NO Mass. I have been to many NO Masses in many parishes and have experienced incredible reverence and incredible irreverence. At one point in my journey the irreverence I experienced caused me to stop attending Mass and seriously consider becoming Eastern Orthodox. I started attending an Orthodox parish where the Divine Liturgy was just incredible. I could literally feel the presence of the saints. I was this close (holding index finger and thumb a 1/4 inch apart) from becoming Orthodox and probably would have had the priest not left the parish. I came to the conclusion that becoming Orthodox was not God’s will for my life.
I came hesitatingly back to my local parish. I left because of the “abuses” I had seen and knew what I would be facing. Could I handle it and remain faithful? Well, the “abuses” weren’t as bad or as numerous as I remembered. I’m not saying things are perfect because they aren’t perfect - I’m just not on heresy or abuse watch anymore. Trust me, I’m no namby pamby, everything is okay, Catholic. I used to get torked out of control about things that weren’t “right” in not only my parish but also in the Church as a whole. However, other things have become more important, or least equally important, to me as pristine liturgy. Some of those things are being able to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, worshipping as a family, the fact that my local parish is also my community (brothers and sisters that I see on a daily basis who I have a relationship with beyond our time at church on Sunday), etc.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that, as I travel my journey, my focus has shifted from my own propensity to be a liturgical cop to one who seeks to embrace the good and beautiful where I can find it. And, I have found that my own, local, parish isn’t so full of abuses as I once thought.
Peace,
Rob
S
SnorterLuster
Guest
Am I reading you right that the Mass is about the people in the pew and not the worship of God? The preference of liturgy is not God’s, but ours? I just don’t understand what you are saying. Shouldn’t the discussion be about what liturgy is probably most pleasing to God?
I am asking because I am genuinely perplexed. I have always believed that the Mass was about God, not me.
R
Rykell
Guest
Catholic Dad:
My focus was changed years ago, too, when I realized the supreme power of the Mass to obtain graces for others. It is, after all, Calvary made present, and while I can pray at home or do mighty works of charity to help my neighbor, there is nothing more excellent than the Mass, no matter how many “irregularities” may or may not be present. It doesn’t change a single thing as far as validity goes. I always believed the spiritual works of mercy held the highest preference (and none is higher than the Mass), while not neglecting the corporal works.
Very nice post, Rob.
My focus was changed years ago, too, when I realized the supreme power of the Mass to obtain graces for others. It is, after all, Calvary made present, and while I can pray at home or do mighty works of charity to help my neighbor, there is nothing more excellent than the Mass, no matter how many “irregularities” may or may not be present. It doesn’t change a single thing as far as validity goes. I always believed the spiritual works of mercy held the highest preference (and none is higher than the Mass), while not neglecting the corporal works.
M
maurin
Guest
I am asking you to explain because I am genuinely perplexed. I have always believed that the Mass was a celebration of the great things God has done for us. That it is about us celebrating Him. The relationship that Jesus made possible.
It is very true that God reaches down to us--------it is equally true that we reach up to Him. Granted it is because of Him that we are able to reach anything at all.
R
Rykell
Guest
Dear Maurin,
Egomania often masks to the possesser of it, the real reasons for prejudice. A person clings defensively to their “right” to be right, and will not entertain logic, doctrine or reasonableness.
A perfect example of this is in in Matthew 11:
This is a difficult question to answer regarding motivation because we are not able to discern the mind of others. Human nature being fallen, tells me that the ego plays a great part in it, for selfishness is learned at the moment of birth. It takes a lifetime to bring us into perfect charity.
Egomania often masks to the possesser of it, the real reasons for prejudice. A person clings defensively to their “right” to be right, and will not entertain logic, doctrine or reasonableness.
A perfect example of this is in in Matthew 11:
- For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon!’
- The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by her children.
C
CatholicNick
Guest
Wow… how insulting.thechrismyster said:
And you said in another thread people who attend the TLM come across as smug?
T
thechrismyster
Guest
personal perceptions are under attack? if you read the post i said in my EXPERIENCE ON CATHOLIC ANSWERS, some TLM advocates’ posts come across as smug.
My post was not smug. it was simply contrasting popular traditional CA thought. there is a difference. a subtle, but clear difference.
S
SnorterLuster
Guest
For me, and for as long as I can remember, I have approached the Mass as being directed to God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. We beg God to hear our prayers and: *And do Thou, O God, vouchsafe in all respects to bless
†´, consecrate †´, and approve †´ this our oblation, to perfect it and render it well-pleasing to Thyself, so that it may become for us the body †´ and blood `†´ of Thy most beloved Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.*The Mass is, and should be directed to God. We ask his blessing and we ask that He find our sacrifice to be acceptable to HIm. We ask Him to receive our prayers. We ask the Saints to intercede on our behalf to make us worthy of God’s favor. Yes, we receive Grace and even our Lord, Jesus Christ, but only if we are worthy. It makes no difference if I am surrounded by unworthy people stained with mortal sin, if I am worthy, I can partake of the Sacred Sacrifice. Likewise, if I am not worthy of God, it makes no difference that everybody around me is worthy to receive, I still will not receive the blessings of God.
I am not well educated in the Bible, but as I remember the Old Testament, many of the stories are about what sacrifices are and are not acceptable to God. If I remember one story right, Able sacrificed to God the best of his flock while Cain offered the stunted grain of his harvest, saving the best for himself. Guess which sacrifice was acceptable to God.
So, long windedly, I am trying to make the point that Mass should be about what is pleasing to God. The liturgy evolved through the years refining the prayers to reflect what God had revealed in scriptures to be pleasing to Him. To say I like the TLM or the N.O. because if fulfills some need within me is missing the point. The point is to fulfill God’s wish for what is due Him.
M
maurin
Guest
I agree with all that you have said, except for your las two sentences, because a relationship is two sided. If our “feelings” were not important as humans, why would God deign to become one of us?
I certainly and wholeheartedly agree with what you said: “So, long windedly [not at all, I thought, you spoke well], I am trying to make the point that Mass should be about what is pleasing to God…” You are absolutely correct, I think.
thanks for taking the time to answer my question. I think we are pretty much of a similar mind.
Peace to you and with gratitude,
maurin
M
maurin
Guest
Dear Rykell,
I loved your response, and you have given me much to think about and pray over. I think that you have come very close to “hitting the nail on the head.”
thank you for your thoughts!!!
J
Jedinovice
Guest
No. And this is where I’m getting mis-interpreted. However, I also think you’re reading thing in dichotomous terms - what is pleasing to God is not pleasing to us. (I fear, therefore, for the next post on this!)
To my mind what is pleasing to God in Mass is a heart surrendered to him, humility and love. What is pleasing to God is a desire for His will. These phrases get taken over by liberals so get interpreted by some Catholics as ‘Nothing matters’ but that’s not what I’m saying.
I am saying that human beings have natural preferences. Have you got that? It’s just a statement of fact.
Now, the next thing I say, following on from that is…
Because we al have preferences it is DANGEROUS to assume that our own preferences equals God’s will. That’s on both sides. Our subjective experience of what makes us experience God (as King or father as it were) does not equal the criteria of objective reality!!!
So, those who like the Pauline rite could say “It makes me feel close to God and the Latin does not. Therefore, the Latin is wrong. It does not lead people to an experience of God.”
Ditto the Tridentine fans could say, "I feel in the presence of God Almighty in this kind of Mass and the ‘NO’ does not. Therefore the Pauline rite is wrong. It does not lead people to an experience of God "
The reality is that subjective experience is down to the individual. So statements like, “The Tridentine makes me feel truly reverent in the presence of the most Holy God” does not constitute the whole of people’s experience and is not an argument for the Tridentine as the Mass for all peoples! Therefore, rolling out the Tridentine will not equal more reverence. Well, it could be but at a risk of coldness of heart.
Therefore, I’m trying to say, both sides need to be aware that their subjective experiences, what ‘turns them on’ in Mass does not equate to the entirety of human experience. Therefore, we must beware confusing subjective experiences for Universal triggers. Both sides are guilty of this but I find the Tridentine fans tend more to say, “The Tridentine makes me feel fully reverent therefore it must be a better Mass.”
Instead, we must submit to the Church on this. The Church having a view on human experience (unless we WANT the Mass to be devoid of all feeling and all expression and never stirring the emotions) does try and produce liturgy to stir the soul. But, because people are different no mater what form the Mass it’s not going to stir everyone the same way!! My fiance’s taste in music leaves me emotionally cold. That’s life. I don’t ay her taste is therefore invalid.
Thus, in all these discussion we must be aware that if we impose one single style of Mass for Unity this means a degree of emotional dissatisfaction for everyone! Since we must impose such Unity (in the main) then emotional dissatisfaction is a given! If the Traditionalists say “I feel dissatisfied with the Pauline rite” then this may be an indicator that the Mass is well balanced because no single form of Mass is going to give everyone an emotional experience. It can’t because people is different!
Do you see? Of source the Pauline rite is going to leave some people cold! Guarenteed! That’s no reason to decry it! Ditto, the Latin leaves me cold but I don’t decry it! I don’t say “Latin leaves me cold therefore the Latin is wrong and should be done away with.”
Therefore, I advocate two things, myself:
- We accept the Pauline rite and accept it’s not going to emotionally satisfy everyone and concentrate on God not our own feelings in the main. We submit to the Church.
- In so far as have the ability to allow for different forms of Mass for different kinds of people, let’s allow it. A Universal Indult for the Tritentine is fine by me. It will help some. But not others, contrary to popular opinions on many boards. Ditto having a Pauline Mass in Latin (say) at 8:00AM with incense and much reverence and a less format vernacular Mass at 10:30 (say.) This is a valid acceptance of the differing natures of people. The Church, where it can, should take people’s personalities into account. Where it can’t the people submit.
J
Jedinovice
Guest
[Continued…]
But what I’m warning against is people saying “This Mass makes me feel more reverent/closer to God/alive/happy [delete as applicable] therefore this form of Mass will do it for everyone!”
People is different. So we gotta treat them with respect and sometimes accept that one ‘style of Mass’ is gonna to be hard on us but easy on another so we SACRIFICE our preference on occasion for love of our brothers and sisters. We can’t have different liturgies - in the main - if we want Unity in Liturgy. That means we can’t please everyone all the time emotionally
Therefore, statements that “The Latin makes me feel fully in the presence of God” are largely meaningless as the vernacular does the same for others - though in a different way.
I’m really saying - too all sides; don’t confuse your personality and your preference for a Universal rule! Also, accept that the Vatican must produce a liturgy for ALL people!! That equals compromise at an emotional level.
But I have a horrible suspicion I know what going to happen now. It’s going to be explained to me that the Tridentine is what is most theologically correct and, thus, most pleasing to God. Therefore the Tridentine is right and the Pauline rite is wrong, or at least inferior and, if we roll out the Tridentine people will really experience God, etc, etc… At that point I vacate because those discussions are always the same.
All I’m really trying to say is, “beware making your preference equal the experience of everyone.”
But what I’m warning against is people saying “This Mass makes me feel more reverent/closer to God/alive/happy [delete as applicable] therefore this form of Mass will do it for everyone!”
People is different. So we gotta treat them with respect and sometimes accept that one ‘style of Mass’ is gonna to be hard on us but easy on another so we SACRIFICE our preference on occasion for love of our brothers and sisters. We can’t have different liturgies - in the main - if we want Unity in Liturgy. That means we can’t please everyone all the time emotionally
Therefore, statements that “The Latin makes me feel fully in the presence of God” are largely meaningless as the vernacular does the same for others - though in a different way.
I’m really saying - too all sides; don’t confuse your personality and your preference for a Universal rule! Also, accept that the Vatican must produce a liturgy for ALL people!! That equals compromise at an emotional level.
But I have a horrible suspicion I know what going to happen now. It’s going to be explained to me that the Tridentine is what is most theologically correct and, thus, most pleasing to God. Therefore the Tridentine is right and the Pauline rite is wrong, or at least inferior and, if we roll out the Tridentine people will really experience God, etc, etc… At that point I vacate because those discussions are always the same.
All I’m really trying to say is, “beware making your preference equal the experience of everyone.”
M
maurin
Guest
(applause…)
I agree on many levels. Your post, I think, would be equally true if we swithched around Tridentine and Pauline throughout you post. Aristotle speaks of truth being found in the middle of two extremes.
The point of my OP is motivation. Thank you for offering another view.
maurin
- Status