Is anyone else bothered

[brigid12]

Diversity does not invalidate or nullify unity. In fact, just think of what happens to any dog breed or any other biological being when there is a lack of diversity. It’s not a good thing, breeding for total sameness cause all sorts of diseases and disorders - even St. Paul talks about it being a necessary thing that there is both variety and unity of gifts - “For as with the human body which is a unity although it has many parts-all the parts of the body, though many, still making up one single body-so it is with Christ…And indeed the body consists not of one member but of many.” I Cor 12:12-15

 

[Matrix_Refugee]

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’m more comfortable wearing pants since I’ve had some less than pleasant experiences wearing skirts; I had a teen-aged co-worker peek up under my near-the-ankle hemline when I was standing on a ladder getting boxes off a shelf, plus I got laughed at once when I was coming out of church once and a gust of wind caught under my skirt and blew it up around my hips, ala Marilyn Monroe in “The Seven-Year Itch”. I don’t wear pants to “look hot”; and for that matter, I wear loose-fitting dress slacks, not tight little jeans or something like that. It’s a personal preference and I wish people would respect it.

 

[Island_Oak]

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…

I’m all for diversity and local customs don’t threaten me…but you’re on target with this point. I sometimes feel there are some parishes out there that might feel very unwelcoming–even to those of us who are Catholic. That’s the part that sadden’s me. It’s like being made to feel like an outsider at your family reunion.

 

[Alethiaphile]

Well, with due respect to everyone who has posted, I think it goes beyond liturgical diversity. In my observation, the world-views of Traditionalist and the average American Catholic are pretty divergent. And I’m not taking sides; there are things I like and dislike about either side. If I had to sum it up in one sentence, I would say the average NO American parish feels cut off from previous Church history, compared to a Traditionalist parish.

 

[Matrix_Refugee]

I’m all for diversity and local customs don’t threaten me…but you’re on target with this point. I sometimes feel there are some parishes out there that might feel very unwelcoming–even to those of us who are Catholic. That’s the part that sadden’s me. It’s like being made to feel like an outsider at your family reunion.

Tell me about it. :: Laughs:: I’ve overheard things at the social hour in the basement of the TLM parish I go to, which I wish I hadn’t heard (ie. uncharitable things people had to say about same-sex attracted people), and there was a man who had a “Homos Need Not Apply” sign in the back window of his car. I printed out some articles from Courage’s website and tucked the print-outs under his windshield wipers, and thankfully, he took down the sign. I’ve resigned myself to being a hermit in my own community.

 

[Genesis315]

Well, with due respect to everyone who has posted, I think it goes beyond liturgical diversity. In my observation, the world-views of Traditionalist and the average American Catholic are pretty divergent. And I’m not taking sides; there are things I like and dislike about either side. If I had to sum it up in one sentence, I would say the average NO American parish feels cut off from previous Church history, compared to a Traditionalist parish.

Besides liturgy, how so? There have been ups and downs throughout Church history and greater and lesser amounts of fervor, etc. I’ve read quite a few letters and things from saints throughout the history of the Church and very often they sound like they are writing today.

For example, just recently I was reading the autobiography of St. Anthony Mary Claret. In Spain and Cuba in the mid-1800s he mentioned how catechesis was non-existent, priests were giving banal sermons about popular stories and not treating the liturgy with reverence, there was a great neglect for confession, people were living in sin (this was especially the case in Cuba), they just believed what was in the bad media (newspapers and books back then), political leaders used the faith as a pretext (accept the queen who seemed pretty faithful), etc., etc.

So, he became a missionary to Catholics.

Jump back a few years and I was reading St. Thomas More complaining of priests “monkeying around” during Mass, telling jokes, not edifying anyone, etc.

Back a few more centuries St. Catherine of Siena writes of such horrendous liturgical abuses they would make people at St. Joan in Minneapolis blush. She also wrote of everyone being worldly and lukewarm and disobedient.

A couple centuries before that St. Peter Damian wrote of similar problems. And before him Basil and Jerome (sorry, I haven’t read too much from around 600–1000).

Anyway, there is nothing new under the sun. There’s always a crisis. There’s always lukewarmness and ignorance. There’s always sin. With the exception of different liturgical books, the current Church in America fits right in. It’s a miracle the Church itself exists as it is today–which of course is simply a proof that Jesus is truly its Head.

The more I read from different eras, the more I can’t find a “golden age”–all though every century has its fair share of ups too–there’s always battles to be fought and flame of charity to spread

 

[StMartin_67]

Genesis315:

For example, just recently I was reading the autobiography of St. Anthony Mary Claret. In Spain and Cuba in the mid-1800s he mentioned how catechesis was non-existent, priests were giving banal sermons about popular stories and not treating the liturgy with reverence, there was a great neglect for confession, people were living in sin (this was especially the case in Cuba), they just believed what was in the bad media (newspapers and books back then), political leaders used the faith as a pretext (accept the queen who seemed pretty faithful), etc., etc.

I believe the issue is one of a different catechisis; not just the lack of catechisis. Most Catholics today believe that many religions are more or less good and praiseworthy, because that is what they have been taught, either explicitly or implicitly.

 

[donmaximuso27]

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!

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?

See above.

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.

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?

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.

So, because Catholics that are not in the SSPX are not adhering to Catholic teaching, and because they are falling in the spiritual sense, it is now ok to be involved, even though it is morally illicit to do so, (see Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei), with the SSPX? As a faithful Catholic, my full communion with the Holy See will never depend on the faithfullness of other members. We must all remain in full communion, for it is the one, true Church. You simply cannot justify committing the illicit act of associating with the SSPX, simply because Catholics are no longer faithful.

 

[ATeamFamily]

I was raised a pagan, was brought into the faith 12 years ago through N.O. church. Our family moved a lot. Five years ago we moved to a city that has a Tridentine Rite church. I absolutely LOVED it from the very first time, even though it took many weeks to get used to the Latin. And I adore the Gregorian chant.

Yes, a handful of traditionalists are pretty picky, but the majority of people at our church are there because of the reverence for the mass that they can’t get anywhere else in this town.

I LOVE the Latin mass.

fssp.org/

 

[Col317]

I’m bothered by fallen humanity, sure. I’ll put myself at the top of the list of reasons I’m bothered. I pray for God to conform me with His grace into a better servant of Christ in His Church. As a pilgrim witness on Earth, I also recognize that the only Everything we have is Eucharist. If you have Everything, then your Church is equal to mine, regardless of whatever else goes on. Also, seeing as how we are fallen, it’s no surprise to me that we bicker over everything from the smallest Truth to the largest Truth. It’s no surprise that some Catholics voted for Obama any more than it’s surprising that I’m a sinful person. So I keep praying. Don’t ask me about SSPX or NO or whatever other acronym you all keep throwing around… I don’t go to SSPX but I’m pretty sure as long as I’m a member of the Catholic Church and faithful to the Pope and keep receiving the Eucharist in my guitar playing, rockin’ out, and sometimes more tradiational (sometimes), Mass… then I have Everything.

Peace,

Col317

 

[KindredSoul]

So, because Catholics that are not in the SSPX are not adhering to Catholic teaching, and because they are falling in the spiritual sense, it is now ok to be involved, even though it is morally illicit to do so, (see Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei), with the SSPX? As a faithful Catholic, my full communion with the Holy See will never depend on the faithfullness of other members. We must all remain in full communion, for it is the one, true Church. You simply cannot justify committing the illicit act of associating with the SSPX, simply because Catholics are no longer faithful.

I agree wholeheartedly. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the TLM, and in fact it’s a very beautiful Mass from what I’ve heard and what very little I’ve seen in videos…but if a person is truly Catholic, participating in and upholding a schismatic group isn’t the answer. It doesn’t matter if SSPX is faithful to Catholic teaching in every other way…to separate from the Holy See is in itself an aberration from true Catholicism, no matter how beautiful or meticulously accurate the Mass may be or how genuinely pious the Parishioners may intend to be.

No doubt the SSPX thinks they’re doing the right thing…but so did the Protestant “Reformers”, who also found breaking off from the Holy See acceptable when they thought the Church was corrupt. Again, this is NOT an insult against Traditional Catholics…this is just a statement that no Catholic, from the most Traditional to the most Modern, should be willing to go against the Holy See or break off from the Holy See to satisfy his or her desires, no matter how noble or in line with God’s will those desires may seem to him personally. It was that same (even if well-intentioned) attitude, after all, that led to Martin Luther’s actions 500 years ago, actions from which the previous cultural strength of Christendom has tragically still not recovered.

Blessings in Christ.

P.S. I just feel the need to repeat: I am NOT insulting Traditional Catholics. I admire Traditional Catholics as much as anyone. A true Traditional Catholic, after all, will adhere to that all important Tradition of remaining in Full Communion with the Holy See, even as he or she seeks a licit TLM to be part of.

 

[franklinf]

I’m bothered by fallen humanity, sure. I’ll put myself at the top of the list of reasons I’m bothered. I pray for God to conform me with His grace into a better servant of Christ in His Church. As a pilgrim witness on Earth, I also recognize that the only Everything we have is Eucharist. If you have Everything, then your Church is equal to mine, regardless of whatever else goes on. Also, seeing as how we are fallen, it’s no surprise to me that we bicker over everything from the smallest Truth to the largest Truth. It’s no surprise that some Catholics voted for Obama any more than it’s surprising that I’m a sinful person. So I keep praying. Don’t ask me about SSPX or NO or whatever other acronym you all keep throwing around… I don’t go to SSPX but I’m pretty sure as long as I’m a member of the Catholic Church and faithful to the Pope and keep receiving the Eucharist in my guitar playing, rockin’ out, and sometimes more tradiational (sometimes), Mass… then I have Everything.

Peace,

Col317

Sometimes more traditional? Masses should always be traditional. The Catholic Faith and her Traditions do not change. I am saddened that there needs to be a distinction made for traditional Catholics. It just goes to show how much modernism and liberalism has infiltrated the Church. Although, to be honest if one is not traditional is one Catholic? If one ignores the dogmas and doctrines of the Church (i.e. Mass attendance, Real Presence in the Eucharist, abortion, etc) is one really Catholic? In that sense there is no distinction between traditional Catholics and Catholics. The teachings of the Church and what the Faithful believe are today what they were in 1950, 1850, 1750, 1250, 450, etc regardless of what some may say.

 

[franklinf]

I agree wholeheartedly. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the TLM, and in fact it’s a very beautiful Mass from what I’ve heard and what very little I’ve seen in videos…but if a person is truly Catholic, participating in and upholding a schismatic group isn’t the answer. It doesn’t matter if SSPX is faithful to Catholic teaching in every other way…to separate from the Holy See is in itself an aberration from true Catholicism, no matter how beautiful or meticulously accurate the Mass may be or how genuinely pious the Parishioners may intend to be.

No doubt the SSPX thinks they’re doing the right thing…but so did the Protestant “Reformers”, who also found breaking off from the Holy See acceptable when they thought the Church was corrupt. Again, this is NOT an insult against Traditional Catholics…this is just a statement that no Catholic, from the most Traditional to the most Modern, should be willing to go against the Holy See or break off from the Holy See to satisfy his or her desires, no matter how noble or in line with God’s will those desires may seem to him personally. It was that same (even if well-intentioned) attitude, after all, that led to Martin Luther’s actions 500 years ago, actions from which Christian clarity and the unity of Christendom have tragically still not recovered.

Blessings in Christ.

P.S. I just feel the need to repeat: I am NOT insulting Traditional Catholics. I admire Traditional Catholics as much as anyone. A true Traditional Catholic, after all, will adhere to that all important Tradition of remaining in Full Communion with the Holy See, even as he or she seeks a licit TLM to be part of.

It harsh and untrue of you to say that a true Catholic should not participate in SSPX Masses or that the SSPX is a schismatic group. The Church Magisterium (in particular, PCED) has stated that the SSPX is NOT in schism (it is an internal matter) and that a Catholic does NOT incur sin or canonical delict when assisting at an SSPX Mass, provided it is done out of love and devotion for the TLM. Furthermore, to compare the SSPX to Martin Luther and his fellow Protestants is completely off base. The Protestants wanted to change the Church - they denied many aspects of Church dogma and doctrine and sought to establish a new church with their heretical beliefs. The SSPX only wants what has always been. They want the Latin Rite and Missal and a continuation of what the Church has always taught.

 

[KindredSoul]

It harsh and untrue of you to say that a true Catholic should not participate in SSPX Masses or that the SSPX is a schismatic group. The Church Magisterium (in particular, PCED) has stated that the SSPX is NOT in schism (it is an internal matter) and that a Catholic does NOT incur sin or canonical delict when assisting at an SSPX Mass, provided it is done out of love and devotion for the TLM. Furthermore, to compare the SSPX to Martin Luther and his fellow Protestants is completely off base. The Protestants wanted to change the Church - they denied many aspects of Church dogma and doctrine and sought to establish a new church with their heretical beliefs. The SSPX only wants what has always been. They want the Latin Rite and Missal and a continuation of what the Church has always taught.

I stand corrected, my brother! I just visited their website, and it seems they do declare loyalty to the Pope, and so I can see what you mean. I seem to have confused them for some group whose website I once visited who believes every Pope since Vatican II is invalid, and boldly claim the N.O. is invalid, etc. THAT group fits every criteria from my previous post…but it would seem the SSPX is not that same group. Terribly sorry about that. The group I was thinking of really does (or at least did, if it doesn’t now) exist, so I wasn’t making everything up and regarding that group I don’t think any of my comments would be an overstatement at all, but I made a terrible error in mistaking the SSPX for that group. For that, I apologize. I don’t know enough about SSPX to sing their praises, but I humbly correct myself in that they certainly weren’t the group I was thinking of.

Blessings in Christ.

P.S. Is the Group I’m thinking of the “Old Catholic Church”, perhaps? I can’t quite remember. Oh well, carry on!

 

[hays1122]

So how do we find out what kind of Catholic Church we are visiting.
How would a visitor know if the mass is following SSPX ,PCED,NOT or TLM.
I went online trying to find out about the churches near me and this information was not available.

 

[KindredSoul]

I don’t know enough about SSPX to sing their praises, but I humbly correct myself in that they certainly weren’t the group I was thinking of.

And now I’m glad I was careful not to actually uphold them in my initial embarassment at my mistake; while thankfully they may not be schismatics, I and it would seem the Church definitely don’t agree with some of the SSPX’s attitudes and views either, so I must yet again amend my assertion back to a stance that a 100% faitfhul Catholic should not accept some of what they teach.

If the Holy See says they’re not schismatics or excommunicated, I must accept that. However, there seems to be a definite reason why they are considered problematic: They seem to reject the Novus Ordo altogether (it’s not within their authority to question it) and the validity of the (New) Catechism of the Catholic Church (also not within their authority to question it). They even appear to question whether or not Vatican II itself was fully orthodox (not the orthodoxy of mere subsequent interpretations)! You can see these things here: sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q13_fraternity.htm
Implications like that simply go too far. They even seem to distrust the FSSP for being faithful to the Magisterium in these matters, which is telling.

So it looks like my previous statements about them were wrong and overstated…but SSPX are definitely just as wrong in certain matters as the overly liberal Catholics are in others; even though I admit that their strong determination to stand up against liturgical abuses and the liberal errors of some individual bishops is admirable, I cannot endorse, nor should any Catholic endorse, their particular opinions that a Mass, a Council, and a Catechism approved by the Pope and Magisterium are somehow invalid. If they have other opinions similar to that, it only exacerbates the problem.

 

[KindredSoul]

So how do we find out what kind of Catholic Church we are visiting.
How would a visitor know if the mass is following SSPX ,PCED,NOT or TLM.
I went online trying to find out about the churches near me and this information was not available.

I suppose maybe a person could find out by calling the bishop of the diocese? Really, the most important thing is that the Parish is celebrating a valid Mass…aside from that, even if the Parish itself is not 100% orthodox, if it’s the only parish nearby and it is ecclesially acceptable for a Catholic to go there, then what matters is that the individual Catholic himself is orthodox. A Catholic church in Communion with the Holy See is a Catholic church in Communion with the Holy See, even if a particular parish or group may have a lot of issues or abuses. So the key is: Know the Faith as infallibly taught by the Church, obey the Church and accept Her authority (which is to obey God), and go to a valid Catholic Mass, wherever it may be and even if you must resist the errors of its individual members or priests. Do those things, and I don’t think you can really go wrong…at least not on a spiritual/moral level. Certain parishes or groups may be pastorally better or more nurturing of orthodoxy though, which brings us back to: Maybe you could ask the bishop or an experienced priest you know to be orthodox and trustworthy. With patience and perseverence, we can find out the nature of any given parish!

Blessings in Christ!

 

[franklinf]

I stand corrected, my brother! I just visited their website, and it seems they do declare loyalty to the Pope, and so I can see what you mean. I seem to have confused them for some group whose website I once visited who believes every Pope since Vatican II is invalid, and boldly claim the N.O. is invalid, etc. THAT group fits every criteria from my previous post…but it would seem the SSPX is not that same group. Terribly sorry about that. The group I was thinking of really does (or at least did, if it doesn’t now) exist, so I wasn’t making everything up and regarding that group I don’t think any of my comments would be an overstatement at all, but I made a terrible error in mistaking the SSPX for that group. For that, I apologize. I don’t know enough about SSPX to sing their praises, but I humbly correct myself in that they certainly weren’t the group I was thinking of.

Blessings in Christ.

P.S. Is the Group I’m thinking of the “Old Catholic Church”, perhaps? I can’t quite remember. Oh well, carry on!

No worries, probably SSPV which is a sedevacantist group that broke off from the SSPX

 

[franklinf]

And now I’m glad I was careful not to actually uphold them in my initial embarassment at my mistake; while thankfully they may not be schismatics, I and it would seem the Church definitely don’t agree with some of the SSPX’s attitudes and views either, so I must yet again amend my assertion back to a stance that a 100% faithful Catholic should not accept some of what they teach.

If the Holy See says they’re not schismatics or excommunicated, I must accept that. However, there seems to be a definite reason why they are considered problematic: They seem to reject the Novus Ordo altogether (it’s not within their authority to question it) and the validity of the (New) Catechism of the Catholic Church (also not within their authority to question it). They even appear to question whether or not Vatican II itself was fully orthodox (not the orthodoxy of mere subsequent interpretations)! You can see these things here: sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q13_fraternity.htm
Implications like that simply go too far. They even seem to distrust the FSSP for being faithful to the Magisterium in these matters, which is telling.

So it looks like my previous statements about them were wrong and overstated…but SSPX are definitely just as wrong in certain matters as the overly liberal Catholics are in others; even though I admit that their strong determination to stand up against liturgical abuses and the liberal errors of some individual bishops is admirable, I cannot endorse, nor should any Catholic endorse, their particular opinions that a Mass, a Council, and a Catechism approved by the Pope and Magisterium are somehow invalid. If they have other opinions similar to that, it only exacerbates the problem.

Yes, currently they are in a state of canonical irregularity (not schismatic). They don’t reject the NO Mass - they accept its validity but view it as deficient to the TLM. The problem they have with Vatican II is ambiguity of certain documents and the liberalness to have come out since (in the “spirit” of Vatican II). Its not a matter of validity with the SSPX but more a matter of deficiency and interpretation.

 

[franklinf]

I suppose maybe a person could find out by calling the bishop of the diocese? Really, the most important thing is that the Parish is celebrating a valid Mass…aside from that, even if the Parish itself is not 100% orthodox, if it’s the only parish nearby and it is ecclesially acceptable for a Catholic to go there, then what matters is that the individual Catholic himself is orthodox. A Catholic church in Communion with the Holy See is a Catholic church in Communion with the Holy See, even if a particular parish or group may have a lot of issues or abuses. So the key is: Know the Faith as infallibly taught by the Church, obey the Church and accept Her authority (which is to obey God), and go to a valid Catholic Mass, wherever it may be and even if you must resist the errors of its individual members or priests. Do those things, and I don’t think you can really go wrong…at least not on a spiritual/moral level. Certain parishes or groups may be pastorally better or more nurturing of orthodoxy though, which brings us back to: Maybe you could ask the bishop or an experienced priest you know to be orthodox and trustworthy. With patience and perseverence, we can find out the nature of any given parish!

Blessings in Christ!

Very wise words. One knows if its a TLM because its usually announced beforehand and pretty different from the NO. As for SSPX / FSSP / ICK their websites list the Masses / Churches they are at so that would be one way to find out. Although I have to differ in one thing - if you keep attending a Mass rife with abuses, one can very definitely be affected spiritually / morally after some time. Its best to try and find a reverent and orthodox Mass to avoid the attacks on the soul.