Is anyone else bothered

[Alethiaphile]

by the fact that there seem to be two separate “brands” of Catholicism, regular and “Traditional”, as evidenced by the existence of a separate “Traditional Catholicism” forum?
I thought one of the marks of the True Church was that it was “One”. Is there really unity of faith in the western Church right now?

 

[Genesis315]

There has always been diversity and unity together. St. Bonaventure describes the Church like Joseph’s many-colored, yet seamless, coat. He explains that the Church takes many different forms across time and place, yet it is still one undivided Church. Different liturgical rites and even theological expressions are legitimate diversity within the one Church.

While there are those who apply labels to themselves with a sectarian attitude, generally the existence of diversity is legitimate.

Likewise, there will always be those who dissent from various doctrines or ecclesiastical laws. That’s the fallen nature of man. It goes on in every era. Getting deep in Church history (by reading letters and other works of the saints in every era) will show that there is always this apparent crisis–unity seems to be always on the brink of complete collapse.

 

[Freshman88]

by the fact that there seem to be two separate “brands” of Catholicism, regular and “Traditional”, as evidenced by the existence of a separate “Traditional Catholicism” forum?
I thought one of the marks of the True Church was that it was “One”. Is there really unity of faith in the western Church right now?

Allow me to turn this around…

by the fact there there seems to be two separate “brands” of Catholicism, regular and “Eastern”, as evidenced by the existend of a separate “Eastern Catholicism” forum?
I thought one of the marks of the True Church was that it was “One”. Is there really unity of faith in the Catholic Church right now?

My point, the Church has never been united liturgically. Not just the East though, even various orders and regions in the West have maintained their own distinct traditions.

 

[Alton001]

It’s really weird because in the past (and quite recently I’d say
within the past six months) I’ve been happier with dates that haven’t
turned out half as good and in some cases, were downright terrible
(but I seemed to click with the people more).

 

[bpbasilphx]

Alethiaphile, I frequently remind people here that Eastern Catholics are traditional, too.

 

[mercygate]

Alethiaphile, I frequently remind people here that Eastern Catholics are traditional, too.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

by the fact that there seem to be two separate “brands” of Catholicism, regular and “Traditional”, as evidenced by the existence of a separate “Traditional Catholicism” forum?
I thought one of the marks of the True Church was that it was “One”. Is there really unity of faith in the western Church right now?

No, what bothers me more is these two brands:

1. Obedient catholics who listen to what the church says and do their best to follow it in their lives
2. Rebels who loudly disagree with the church on various issues and try to lead others to join them in their rebellion

I don’t really mind if people like to worship in different ways. But they shouldn’t be at church just to lead others away or to express disagreement.

 

[brotherhrolf]

There is a separate Traditional Catholicism forum because it recognizes the fact that not all of us in the pews back in the late 60’s embraced the NO. We submitted to the Magesterium of HMC. For better or worse, like it or not, HMC is significantly different from the church I grew up in.

My conscience was formed before Vatican II. I am very much a “Baltimore Catechism” kind of guy. Many today would call me scrupulous. That’s OK. It is how I was raised.

When the sun sets and the day is done, we are one Church - unam sanctam catholicam et apostolicam .

For those of you for whom HMC existed after 1970, you need to realize that there are still significant numbers of us alive today who were born long before 1970. I graduated from a Catholic boy’s high school in 1969. You have no idea of the profound shock it was to me to sing in the choir in Latin for the graduation Mass of 1968 and then to have guitars and Simon and Garfunkle for my graduation Mass a year later.

I can only speak for myself. I saw my parents marginalized in the 1970s. Ours was a brand new parish church in 1967 with an organ. By 1971 the organ was silent and was replaced by guitar strumming “Sons of God, hear His Holy Word” type of folks. So my folks quit attending the 10 am Mass and moved to the 8. It didn’t take too long and the 8 had guitars…so they moved to the Vigil Mass on Saturday (remarkable in and of itself in that the Anticipated Mass was a very, very new concept back then).

I am thankful that God, in His Infinite Wisdom, offered me an opportunity to sing in the cathedral choir in 1983. We drive 25 miles one way and have driven since 1983. I’m not hung up on a Latin Mass. I am hung up that the Mass be reverent. My kids, at least, grew up with hearing chant and sacred motets

The baby got tossed out with the bathwater all those years ago. The baby is still very much alive and kicking. We are One Church. The Holy Father has given the OK to those of us who remember differently and to those of us who chose, the right to the liturgy of our ancestors.

 

[TheDoctor]

by the fact that there seem to be two separate “brands” of Catholicism, regular and “Traditional”, as evidenced by the existence of a separate “Traditional Catholicism” forum? I thought one of the marks of the True Church was that it was “One”. Is there really unity of faith in the western Church right now?

In short, bothered? Nah.

The existence of the Traditional Catholic Forum should not be seen as a “separate brand” of Catholicism (it was mainly created so folks could complain about the music at the NO and if the SSPX is in schism without clogging up the Liturgy & Sacraments and Apologetics forums ).

Remember that in anything, there will be folks all along the spectrum of opinion from the left to the right. In the Catholic Church, that applies across all 23 rites as well.

Most of the folks fall somewhere in the middle: We don’t mind the OF but we like the traditional prayers and devotions; we like the EF but also relaxation of disciplines that do not aid in spiritual growth, etc. The fact that the Church allows us to have a reasonable amount of diversity of opinion and practice is one of our greatest strengths. The Church is not exactly the same as it was 2,000 years ago and will not be exactly the same 2,000 years from now but it will still be the Church.

Of course, you will find folks at both ends of the spectrum. The folks way off to the right who don’t think anything good came after the Council of Trent tend to post most in this forum. The folks way off to the left who don’t think anything good came before Vatican II tend to post at CARM.

 

[brotherhrolf]

The existence of the Traditional Catholic Forum should not be seen as a “separate brand” of Catholicism (it was mainly created so folks could complain about the music at the NO).

Most of the folks fall somewhere in the middle: We don’t mind the OF but we like the traditional prayers and devotions; we like the EF but also relaxation of disciplines that do not aid in spiritual growth, etc.

Guilty as charged. But it is not just the music…I was taught that when I entered into the Presence, I entered into the sacred. Wouldn’t know that today at my local geographic parish where the ushers (older than me no less) think it’s perfectly OK to discuss the efficacy of Preparation H. in the vestibule. (No I am not making that up).

As to the 23 other rites? In 57 years I have had no exposure to them. However, from what I have read on these forums, they treat the Presence with the same awe and respect that I do. I could not pray in peace before Mass at my local geographic parish. Our Lord may have been present on the altar but from the way people behaved we might as well have been our local Southern Baptist church.

 

[tecvba]

There is a separate Traditional Catholicism forum because it recognizes the fact that not all of us in the pews back in the late 60’s embraced the NO. We submitted to the Magesterium of HMC. For better or worse, like it or not, HMC is significantly different from the church I grew up in.

My conscience was formed before Vatican II. I am very much a “Baltimore Catechism” kind of guy. Many today would call me scrupulous. That’s OK. It is how I was raised.

When the sun sets and the day is done, we are one Church - unam sanctam catholicam et apostolicam .

For those of you for whom HMC existed after 1970, you need to realize that there are still significant numbers of us alive today who were born long before 1970. I graduated from a Catholic boy’s high school in 1969. You have no idea of the profound shock it was to me to sing in the choir in Latin for the graduation Mass of 1968 and then to have guitars and Simon and Garfunkle for my graduation Mass a year later.

I can only speak for myself. I saw my parents marginalized in the 1970s. Ours was a brand new parish church in 1967 with an organ. By 1971 the organ was silent and was replaced by guitar strumming “Sons of God, hear His Holy Word” type of folks. So my folks quit attending the 10 am Mass and moved to the 8. It didn’t take too long and the 8 had guitars…so they moved to the Vigil Mass on Saturday (remarkable in and of itself in that the Anticipated Mass was a very, very new concept back then).

I am thankful that God, in His Infinite Wisdom, offered me an opportunity to sing in the cathedral choir in 1983. We drive 25 miles one way and have driven since 1983. I’m not hung up on a Latin Mass. I am hung up that the Mass be reverent. My kids, at least, grew up with hearing chant and sacred motets

The baby got tossed out with the bathwater all those years ago. The baby is still very much alive and kicking. We are One Church. The Holy Father has given the OK to those of us who remember differently and to those of us who chose, the right to the liturgy of our ancestors.

I am totally in agreement with you. I also go out of my way for a Latin Mass because I find it so reverent. (It is approved by the bishop but we do have SSPX and SSPV churches here, too) My neighborhood parish is a guiter playing, hand holding kind of place and that’s fine as long as the Mass is celebrated according to the GIRM-which is frequently isn’t.
I believed back then, and still do believe, that Mass is to worship God. The focus should be on God Almighty and not on ourselves. To become friends with fellow parishoners is what the parish hall and all the volunteer groups are for, not the church. I have been to Mass at one particular place affiliated with a college that the noise level before mass would raise the dead. Since the tabernacle is way off yonder somewhere there is no reminder we are in God’s house, not our own. It sounds more like a movie theater. There is no reverence at all. And in case anyone wonders I barely remember the Latin Mass as a kid-I grew up in the NO mostly.
So to answer the question originally asked here, it doesn’t bother me in the least. What I find amusing is the folks who are saying the extraordinary form (Latin Mass as celebrated before 1962) shouldn’t be allowed because it’s devisive and confusing. How about us folks who thought the same thing about the NO over 40 years ago. I will not force anyone to go to a Latin Mass if they don’t want to, I’m just glad we do have a choice now that has been legitimized by Our Holy Father.

 

[Matrix_Refugee]

Unity through diversity seems to be the norm for human life, so the same would apply to the human community and family that is the Church.

What bugs me though are the Traditionalists who get rigorous to the point of being uncharitable, to the point that they practically become fundamentalist Catholics, ie. the sort who get on my case about not being married with a pewful of kids, or who accuse me of being immodest if I come to Mass wearing pants. I love the Latin Mass, but it saddens me to meet Traditional Catholics who seem to be caught in a time loop so that they think it’s perpetually the 1940s or 1950s…

 

[CassiusLonginus]

What bugs me though are the Traditionalists who get rigorous to the point of being uncharitable,

Nobody likes it, but it’s almost a fact of online life. People are generally more abrasive on the net, and it’s not just trads who become uncharitable.

or who accuse me of being immodest if I come to Mass wearing pants.

If I were a woman I wouldn’t go to Mass wearing pants either. I think I’d rather model myself after the Blessed Virgin, i.e. not a lot of skin showing (I don’t mean 1st c. palestinian dress, but rather long skirts, long sleeves, high neck-line, covered hair etc.) Generally speaking, pants, the way they are worn my ‘modern’ women aren’t very feminine and are made to accentuate certain parts of a woman’s body. There is no ‘feminine mystique’, rather ‘these pants make me look hott’. I’d rather have the boys at Mass pay attention to the Mass than to some woman’s display.

I love the Latin Mass, but it saddens me to meet Traditional Catholics who seem to be caught in a time loop so that they think it’s perpetually the 1940s or 1950s…

Most of the TLM women I know dress very stylishly and contemporarily, but also modestly. Also, it saddens and sickens me to see OF Catholic women go to Mass dressed the way many women go to the club…mini-skirt, 4 inch heels, tank top, tons of cleavage, tons of leg…

You see, everybody makes mistakes, not just trads, not just OF…you and I.

 

[DiscipleofHis]

by the fact that there seem to be two separate “brands” of Catholicism, regular and “Traditional”, as evidenced by the existence of a separate “Traditional Catholicism” forum?
I thought one of the marks of the True Church was that it was “One”. Is there really unity of faith in the western Church right now?

I have a friend in seminary in Ohio and he felt a lot of division because here in TX in the bible belt we have been greatly influenced by the newer music and “lets go to church to have fun”
mentality and reverence has notable suffered. He has ran into several in seminary that scoff at the practices that are normal to him in preference of the High Mass style and this was an adjustment for him. There is even debate going on as to weather or not to have Teen Mass due to the effects it may have on teens going off to college and not able to find the “have fun” environment. I am a convert to the Church about 20 yrs now from Assembly of God so I did not think much of it at first but as my adoration for the Eucharist and the Real Presence develops, I see lack of Sacredness on the rise but I know Mother Church adopts and corrects as warrents. There is nothing more beautiful than incense and an Easter vigil I will have to admit but I dont want to have to be afraid of some holding hands and some not etc. I guess I am somewhere in the middle of the road, I just know I love this Church. The beutiful thing about it is that at the final blessing we are all united under the same Blessed Sacrament.
God Bless you all.

 

[Mike51]

There is a separate Traditional Catholicism forum because it recognizes the fact that not all of us in the pews back in the late 60’s embraced the NO. We submitted to the Magesterium of HMC. For better or worse, like it or not, HMC is significantly different from the church I grew up in.

My conscience was formed before Vatican II. I am very much a “Baltimore Catechism” kind of guy. Many today would call me scrupulous. That’s OK. It is how I was raised.

When the sun sets and the day is done, we are one Church - unam sanctam catholicam et apostolicam .

For those of you for whom HMC existed after 1970, you need to realize that there are still significant numbers of us alive today who were born long before 1970. I graduated from a Catholic boy’s high school in 1969. You have no idea of the profound shock it was to me to sing in the choir in Latin for the graduation Mass of 1968 and then to have guitars and Simon and Garfunkle for my graduation Mass a year later.

I can only speak for myself. I saw my parents marginalized in the 1970s. Ours was a brand new parish church in 1967 with an organ. By 1971 the organ was silent and was replaced by guitar strumming “Sons of God, hear His Holy Word” type of folks. So my folks quit attending the 10 am Mass and moved to the 8. It didn’t take too long and the 8 had guitars…so they moved to the Vigil Mass on Saturday (remarkable in and of itself in that the Anticipated Mass was a very, very new concept back then).

I am thankful that God, in His Infinite Wisdom, offered me an opportunity to sing in the cathedral choir in 1983. We drive 25 miles one way and have driven since 1983. I’m not hung up on a Latin Mass. I am hung up that the Mass be reverent. My kids, at least, grew up with hearing chant and sacred motets

The baby got tossed out with the bathwater all those years ago. The baby is still very much alive and kicking. We are One Church. The Holy Father has given the OK to those of us who remember differently and to those of us who chose, the right to the liturgy of our ancestors.

Thank you!

 

[donmaximuso27]

It is bothering to read threads and posts that attempt to justify the SSPX, twisting one Church document after another to satisfy the argument in favor of this group. Furthermore, some users then twist documents to try and prove that the OF is invalid, and is of lesser value then the EF. The Magisterium, and our Holy Father, have made it clear, that all rites and forms are equal in value, and are both valid. Therefore, when thread after thread is created to discuss how one may be invalid, or how the other may be lesser in value, it is extremely bothering. Catholics need to realize that both the EF and the OF are equal in their sacredness. Both forms are open to liturgical abuses, I have witnessed many from both. Both forms can be very solemn, beautiful masses. It is time for us to realize that both the existence of the EF and OF are not meant to divide us Catholics, but rather, to allow us to be able to worship in the form that we feel nurtures our spiritual life. When one is not available, then simply attend the other, and realize that it is indeed the Holy Sacrifice.

 

[CassiusLonginus]

It is bothering to read threads and posts that attempt to justify the SSPX, twisting one Church document after another to satisfy the argument in favor of this group.

And somehow it’s the SSPX that has the 99.9% Mass attendance rate and a general lack of confusion regarding all things Catholic. Even the children know their faith. You should be wary of calling the SSPX’s manoeuvers “twisting”. In a modern church fraught with ambiguity, emotionally based arguments, and political belly-upping, the SSPX is a bastian of clearheaded thinking. Case in point: Their claim that the EF hadn’t been abrogated. SSPX clerics, 1, modern church clerics, 0. Another case in point: the recent election where the majority of ‘modern’ Catholics voted for the most pro-baby murder, pro-gay ‘marriage’ candidate that government has seen. I suppose the economy and the lives of 4,000 volunteer soldiers are more important than the lives of 50 million+ unborn children…speaking of ‘twisting’ and ‘satisfying arguments’…ahem, everybody vote for Obama, YAY!

Furthermore, some users then twist documents to try and prove that the OF is invalid, and is of lesser value then the EF.

The OF in and of itself isn’t invalid, and I don’t know any SSPX person who has said otherwise. However, the OF can be invalid given the disposition of trad priests versus many, many OF priests. Trad priests take their job seriously and it is quite obvious that many OF priests don’t. The Masses are equal insofar as they turn bread and wine into Christ, however, if you could either choose a TLM versus an oft abuse-filled OF, which would you choose? Why take the bad with the good?

The Magisterium, and our Holy Father, have made it clear, that all rites and forms are equal in value, and are both valid. Therefore, when thread after thread is created to discuss how one may be invalid, or how the other may be lesser in value, it is extremely bothering. Catholics need to realize that both the EF and the OF are equal in their sacredness.

See above.

Both forms are open to liturgical abuses, I have witnessed many from both.

What liturgical abuses have you wintessed at the EF? Was this pre-Vatican II? I ask because perhaps once the OF came on the scene and people realized what had been lost, perhaps then they made sure to celebrate the TLM perfectly. To date I can’t say that I’ve seen an abuse at a TLM and it’s been about 4 years now.

Both forms can be very solemn, beautiful masses. It is time for us to realize that both the existence of the EF and OF are not meant to divide us Catholics

Perhaps it is time for OF priests to realize that the OF can be very solemn and beautiful. I think that this is the dividing issue. My 22 years in the OF showed that priests wanted to perpetuate more and more banal ‘worship services’. Who here attends an abuse free OF?

When one is not available, then simply attend the other, and realize that it is indeed the Holy Sacrifice.

I don’t know about you, but I have a wife and children to think about. I cannot “simply attend the other”. I haven’t been to any NO church since I’ve lived here, and I wouldn’t arbitrarily go to one and possibly endager the faiths of my wife and sons by showing up at a veritable circus full of who knows what.

 

[tecvba]

It is bothering to read threads and posts that attempt to justify the SSPX, twisting one Church document after another to satisfy the argument in favor of this group. Furthermore, some users then twist documents to try and prove that the OF is invalid, and is of lesser value then the EF. The Magisterium, and our Holy Father, have made it clear, that all rites and forms are equal in value, and are both valid. Therefore, when thread after thread is created to discuss how one may be invalid, or how the other may be lesser in value, it is extremely bothering. Catholics need to realize that both the EF and the OF are equal in their sacredness. Both forms are open to liturgical abuses, I have witnessed many from both. Both forms can be very solemn, beautiful masses. It is time for us to realize that both the existence of the EF and OF are not meant to divide us Catholics, but rather, to allow us to be able to worship in the form that we feel nurtures our spiritual life. When one is not available, then simply attend the other, and realize that it is indeed the Holy Sacrifice.

In my particular instance the Latin Mass is said by priests from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter which was founded by 12 priests origianally with the SSPX but who wanted to be reconciled with Rome and were. We do have a couple of SSPX churches here and one SSPV which are considerably more strident and call the Church after Vatican II “the New Church”. As I said before I prefer the Latin Mass although I was pretty much raised on the NO. I am just glad we have a choice as I prefer the quiet and solemnity over the NO style in my particular parish, although I go to NO masses with no problem.

 

[TheDoctor]

WICKED COOL! Only took 17 posts to go from “Is there really unity among the Western Church” to the “SSPX is better than you” debate.

 

[barb_finnegan]

Very interesting posts…

I was raised in the Latin Mass, and went to the NO for all of my late childhood, teenage, and young adult years. When I started driving, I went to other NO parishes by myself. In the last five years have I gone to Latin Masses said by diocesan, FSSP, SSPX and SSPV priests. I know I’m not a theologian or a liturgist -but I can’t see the difference between the Latin Masses said by these priests!

There is a church run by the SSPX an hour’s drive from me, and an SSPV chapel in my hometown. I do agree with the poster from Ohio who said that the SSPV priests tend to be more strident about the ‘New Church’ (I heard that term just this past week).

I just wish that the infighting and bickering between traditional Catholic groups would stop, and they would ‘come back to the fold’. It makes me sad that the SSPV especially has nothing good to say about our Holy Father…and yet they are good priests! There is their community of Sisters, the “Daughters of Mary”-I’ve gotten to know some of them, and they’re good, too! I also have their music tapes and [one] CD.