Leaning towards traditonal Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter glamourdollxoxo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

glamourdollxoxo

Guest
I have started to embrace traditional Catholicism and have been leaning more towards that than NO. When I move out of state I plan on attending a SSPX Parish since I love the Latin Mass and I plan on using a chapel veil to cover at mass and prayer times. I have never felt so on fire and alive for God and the Latin Mass somehow makes mass seem more sacred and pure to me. My only hope is that I will be able to find a future husband who is a traditional Catholic since I probably seem pretty extreme for being only 22. I think I am the only 22 year old I know who is all for covering and loves SSPX parishes I can’t help but wonder if my way of living is off putting to most Catholic guys my age.
 
I am 16 and TOTALLY in love with the traditional mass! Your not alone… There is actually a lot young people starting to embrace traditionalism. I am happy u found it, and I will pray for you 👍
 
I am 16 and TOTALLY in love with the traditional mass! Your not alone… There is actually a lot young people starting to embrace traditionalism. I am happy u found it, and I will pray for you 👍
Hear hear! I am sixteen as well, and it is true - there is a growing movement for traditionalism.

~ Pius :knight1:
 
I don’t think it is off putting in anyway. I think most Catholic men appreciate devout and pious women. Although, why SSPX. Why not just go and attend the Traditional Latin Mass. For example there is a Parish in my Diocese that does that, requires women to wear shawls and headcovers ect… that is not part of the SSPX movement and is still obediant to the Bishop of Rome.
 
Don’t be Traditional for the sake of being traditional. Be a follower of Christ, and this means being Catholic without the politics. If there is a Latin Mass in your area that is not an SSPX Chapel I suggest rather going there. I found this sentence problematic:
I have started to embrace traditional Catholicism and have been leaning more towards that than NO
… because it pits one form against the other, as if you have to “embrace” the Latin Mass, and simultaneously forget the Ordinary Form. You probably didn’t mean it that way, and I am probably reading into things.

That said, it’s great that you love the Latin Mass and that you feel so inspired by it to be a faithful Catholic. I feel the same way too.
 
I’m 16 and I will get to a Latin Mass eventually. I love tradition, but I have strong ties indeed with my home parish, I serve on Saturdays and Sundays. I might go one weekday after school!
 
I’m 16 and I will get to a Latin Mass eventually. I love tradition, but I have strong ties indeed with my home parish, I serve on Saturdays and Sundays. I might go one weekday after school!
Atta’ boy! If all three of us 16 year olds intend to enter the Seminary, the Church will have quite a treat! 👍

I serve both the OF and the EF, it is good to see both. Viva il Papa!

~ Pius :knight1:
 
Our oldest daughter is now married to a good guy who was looking for someone with similar views about the faith. She was 22 when we started attending an SSPX chapel six years ago. Do you really want to have a future husband that is “offput” because you wear a veil at Mass? Traditional Catholic guys like girls too. Our son-in-law would not have considered dating our daughter at all if she wasn’t at least “pretty extreme” and observant of Marian standards of modesty all the time.

God Bless,

Planty Pall
 
Our oldest daughter is now married to a good guy who was looking for someone with similar views about the faith. She was 22 when we started attending an SSPX chapel six years ago. Do you really want to have a future husband that is “offput” because you wear a veil at Mass? Traditional Catholic guys like girls too. Our son-in-law would not have considered dating our daughter at all if she wasn’t at least “pretty extreme” and observant of Marian standards of modesty all the time.

God Bless,

Planty Pall
What I have found with most young traditional Catholic men, is that they are more drawn to the Priesthood than to the married life. Leaving most traditional young women to either seek a minority of those young traditional men to marry, or to enter the Convent. 🤷

~ Pius :knight1:
 
Be a follower of Christ, and this means being Catholic without the politics. If there is a Latin Mass in your area that is not an SSPX Chapel I suggest rather going there.
I agree with this. It is not good to view the church as being split into ‘traditional Catholics’ and ‘others’. That is not the case. We belong to the one church. Yes, the politics is there and it is not pretty, but we have to be above that and work for unity. That said, I am all for EF and prefer it without a doubt and am not shy about promoting it to other Catholics I know, so they can benefit from the rich traditions of the church. I am also tempted to see the cause as ‘us vs. them’ but pray for clarity and spirit of obedience to the church. These are difficult times for us who call ourselves traditonal and I guess we have a job to do so things change for the better. So please, consider a FSSP parish if possible, or just a regular parish that has EF mass, rather than a group whose status is still not settled. I pray that this issue with SSPX will be sorted out so people like you do not have to suffer from difficult decisions and confusion as to where they belong.

Also, it is amazing how many youngsters are discovering out Catholic traditions and are embracing it. 👍 (I really sound old now LOL)
 
I would very much like to go to a Traditional Mass at some point. It’s hard though because there’s only one church that’s kinda close by that does it. Based on what I hear though, the EF sounds amazing and I wish there was a church nearby that would do it daily. Btw, I’m 19 and am also very interested in Traditional Catholicism, though I do believe the Church to be infallible and the Pope to be the vicar of Christ so I wouldn’t attend an SSPX mass until things are sorted out.
 
Btw, I’m 19 and am also very interested in Traditional Catholicism, though I do believe the Church to be infallible and the Pope to be the vicar of Christ so I wouldn’t attend an SSPX mass until things are sorted out.
Just so you know, Traditional Catholics [though I don’t really enjoy the term personally] do believe in all the teachings of the Church, and the SSPX also believe the Pope to be the Vicar of Christ and believe in all the teachings of the Church, so don’t think they [or any “trad” Catholic] are schismatics or heretics.

This is the problem with the labels. I am a Catholic who personally finds the EF more fulfilling spiritually, and who finds that the use of latin is good and proper within the Latin Rite. I also love gregorian chant, and am drawn to a strict, more austere expression of the faith. I say my rosary in Latin, and I get down when I hear heresy from anybody within the Church. Does that make me a “trad”? I shouldn’t think so. It just makes me Catholic. If I said the Rosary in English would I be less-trad? Well, the Rosary is over 500 years old, how would I be less-trad? See what I mean? Most of us are Latin Rite Catholics, and we should thus be familiar with Latin, and I believe that to be true of everybody within the Latin Rite. Does that make me a trad? Not really, it means I want the “Latin” part of the “Latin Rite” to mean something. I want the VII documents to be properly understood. I think the OF and EF should be offered in every parish, since it is still one Rite. People label these kinds of thing “trad” so as to divide. Expressing the Catholic faith fully shouldn’t be labelled anything other than “Catholic”.
 
Actually the wonderful Novus Ordo mass is much more traditional than the Latin Tridentine Mass. The original tradition of the mass, “the breaking of the bread” was in the language of the people. It was the Roman rite that broke with the tradition of the church and later demanded that mass be said in an elitist language very few people understood. This even led to the Roman rite later taking away communion under both species from the people. Among all the other Catholic rites, the Roman rite was virtually alone in these two “innovations.” The fathers at the Second Vatican Council were keenly aware that the Roman Rite had departed in many ways from the “real traditions” of the church. Also, during the Council. the Roman rite bishops were often reminded by the bishops of other Catholic rites that they should return to our orginal traditons, especially in the vernacular language and communion under both species. This had a profound effect on the Council fathers, who I believe were truly guided by the Holy Spirit. So when you go to a mass you do not understand, with a priest facing away from God and the people, with a railing seperating the altar table and the people, and not being being allowed to follow Jesus’s request that we receive His Body and Blood, remember these are later innovations. Also, remember these are your choices. The Spirit has made available to us now, a mass that we can understand and where we can really open our hearts up. If we only take it. A few years ago, we had some “traditionalist” priests take over our parish. They promptly took away communion under both species. They said we weren’t good enough, only priests were (I am not making this up). I really feel the loss at not being able to receive communion as Jesus allowed and indeed wants us to.
 
What I have found with most young traditional Catholic men, is that they are more drawn to the Priesthood than to the married life.
This is so true it makes me sad in a selfish kinda way. All the young traditional-leaning Catholic men around my age that I know are either priests, or on the verge of being ordained. 😦
Leaving most traditional young women to either seek a minority of those young traditional men to marry, or to enter the Convent. 🤷
Don’t forget the consecrated virgins. Sadly, I think that’s the route I’m going to end up on. I met a nice guy once at Confession on a Saturday night, but sadly I wasn’t able to take him up on his offer to go for coffee, and me being me, didn’t think to offer an alternative date.
 
Actually the wonderful Novus Ordo mass is much more traditional than the Latin Tridentine Mass. The original tradition of the mass, “the breaking of the bread” was in the language of the people. It was the Roman rite that broke with the tradition of the church and later demanded that mass be said in an elitist language very few people understood. This even led to the Roman rite later taking away communion under both species from the people. Among all the other Catholic rites, the Roman rite was virtually alone in these two “innovations.” The fathers at the Second Vatican Council were keenly aware that the Roman Rite had departed in many ways from the “real traditions” of the church. Also, during the Council. the Roman rite bishops were often reminded by the bishops of other Catholic rites that they should return to our orginal traditons, especially in the vernacular language and communion under both species. This had a profound effect on the Council fathers, who I believe were truly guided by the Holy Spirit. So when you go to a mass you do not understand, with a priest facing away from God and the people, with a railing seperating the altar table and the people, and not being being allowed to follow Jesus’s request that we receive His Body and Blood, remember these are later innovations. Also, remember these are your choices. The Spirit has made available to us now, a mass that we can understand and where we can really open our hearts up. If we only take it. A few years ago, we had some “traditionalist” priests take over our parish. They promptly took away communion under both species. They said we weren’t good enough, only priests were (I am not making this up). I really feel the loss at not being able to receive communion as Jesus allowed and indeed wants us to.
Welcome to CAF.

I hate to be abrupt, but you’ve posted a lot of false information mixed in with some poor understanding and your own bias. Understandable I guess. Could you cite sources for some of your claims? Specifically, the false claim that Latin was an elitist language that few understood? And it was the Latin that somehow forced us to receive under only one kind? And that the Latin Rite departed from the traditions of the Church? [you are aware that the OF is a Latin Rite Mass?].
 
Actually the wonderful Novus Ordo mass is much more traditional than the Latin Tridentine Mass. The original tradition of the mass, “the breaking of the bread” was in the language of the people. It was the Roman rite that broke with the tradition of the church and later demanded that mass be said in an elitist language very few people understood. This even led to the Roman rite later taking away communion under both species from the people. Among all the other Catholic rites, the Roman rite was virtually alone in these two “innovations.” The fathers at the Second Vatican Council were keenly aware that the Roman Rite had departed in many ways from the “real traditions” of the church. Also, during the Council. the Roman rite bishops were often reminded by the bishops of other Catholic rites that they should return to our orginal traditons, especially in the vernacular language and communion under both species. This had a profound effect on the Council fathers, who I believe were truly guided by the Holy Spirit. So when you go to a mass you do not understand, with a priest facing away from God and the people, with a railing seperating the altar table and the people, and not being being allowed to follow Jesus’s request that we receive His Body and Blood, remember these are later innovations. Also, remember these are your choices. The Spirit has made available to us now, a mass that we can understand and where we can really open our hearts up. If we only take it.
So the Spirit erred and 1500 years later corrected it’s errors with the New Mass?
Or the Spirit wasn’t with the Church for the 1500 years before the New Mass?
If you don’t know why Vatican 2 supporters are compared to Protestants by actual Catholics your above quote is a good example as to why. The idea that 1500 years of Church Tradition was flawed and needed correction completely smacks of Lutheranism.
If our Church is guided by the Holy Spirit (which it indeed is) there is no need for men to undo the Traditions It has inspired.
The younger generations are becoming attracted to the Traditional Mass more and more, they sense the void and lack of mystery and holiness in New Order pseudo Catholicism, and they want the real thing, the Church that modernists have selfishly, to satisfy their own arrogance, deprived them of.
 
The younger generations are becoming attracted to the Traditional Mass more and more, they sense the void and lack of mystery and holiness in New Order pseudo Catholicism, and they want the real thing, the Church that modernists have selfishly, to satisfy their own arrogance, deprived them of.
I don’t think Thomas Redd is correct (far from it) but neither are you in what I quote. It’s ironic that you mention the Church not being able to err, but then go on to claim that Ordinary Form is pseudo-Catholicism and modernist. I also think it’s unfair to say that the changes were all down to selfishness and arrogance. If anything, Church leaders at the time were confused! This type of response won’t win you any friends or supporters. I don’t appreciate being called a pseudo-Catholic just because at this point in time I attend the Ordinary Form.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top