My view of "traditionalists"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Franciscum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Teresita:
This is actually just as true/untrue as the original claim apparently being refuted here. The ‘Tridentine Mass’ was a codification of a Mass which in most of its basics (such as the Canon) goes back to the sixth century; there were many different ‘uses’ which grew up during succeeding centuries, but they varied far less than one might think. You don’t have to believe me: check out the Net, comparing (for instance) Sarum Use - the normal rite used in England - with the Roman Missal, or with the Dominican rite. You have to look fairly closely to pick out the differences.

The modern Roman Rite is different not only in its use of the vernacular, but in many of the prayers (both what’s in and what’s out). It reminds me a little of the ‘Notes’ produced for students reading Shakespeare, where the language is not only modernised but dumbed down, so that “No, this my hand will rather/ The multitudinous seas incarnadine,/ Making the green one red” becomes “The blood on my hand will turn all the green seas red”. The meaning’s there, but the depth and beauty isn’t. So I have no problem with the validity of the modern rite, but I do with the ancient beauty which has been lost - especially in the ICEL translation, which is not only inaccurate at times, but plods. I realise that this is another arca vermium*, however.

Sue

*can (well, box, but what the tartarus…) of worms
Click to expand...
Sue, what you say is also partly correct and partly not. The 6th Century is not 1900 or 2000 years ago. The first Eucharists were in the vernaculer. Latin or Greek was the vernaculer, at least for the educated. I agree that the principal parts of the mass were established early on but even today as back then there are variations in the rites by both Religous Orders and other groups that recognize Papal authority such as the Byzantines. Yes it is true that some of the older forms are beautiful but not easily understood in culturtes where “you know” follows every other statement. The language of the King James version is very pleasant on the ears, but we don’t let that influence which translations we use. Lets just say I thank you for your corrections and hope you are not miffed. Peace. Dick
 
If it is acceptable to have many different rites, such as the case exists with the Eastern Rites (Byzantine, Ukranian, Melkite, Maronite, Armenian, Syro-Malabar, Syro-Malankar, etc), then why can’t there be two rites in the Western Church?

If no one has a problem with the many eastern rites, then why does everyone always get up in arms when the suggestion is made that there should be a separate Tridentine Rite, with its own Bishops and Priests, for people who want to use the liturgical books of 1962?
40.png
rwoehmke:
Sue, what you say is also partly correct and partly not. The 6th Century is not 1900 or 2000 years ago. The first Eucharists were in the vernaculer. Latin or Greek was the vernaculer, at least for the educated. I agree that the principal parts of the mass were established early on but even today as back then there are variations in the rites by both Religous Orders and other groups that recognize Papal authority such as the Byzantines. Yes it is true that some of the older forms are beautiful but not easily understood in culturtes where “you know” follows every other statement. The language of the King James version is very pleasant on the ears, but we don’t let that influence which translations we use. Lets just say I thank you for your corrections and hope you are not miffed. Peace. Dick
Click to expand...
 
I wish I had time to post a full repsonse to this thread, but I’m minutes away from leaving for a weekend retreat. Instead, I thought I’d post a link to a blog post I made that may interest parrticipants in this thread. (It’s a response to some schismatic traditionalists I’ve had online discussions with, so it’s a bit of a tanget but some of the contents may interest people).

credibility.blogspot.com/2004/11/problem-with-radtrads.html%between%
 
40.png
csbyrnes84:
If it is acceptable to have many different rites, such as the case exists with the Eastern Rites (Byzantine, Ukranian, Melkite, Maronite, Armenian, Syro-Malabar, Syro-Malankar, etc), then why can’t there be two rites in the Western Church?

If no one has a problem with the many eastern rites, then why does everyone always get up in arms when the suggestion is made that there should be a separate Tridentine Rite, with its own Bishops and Priests, for people who want to use the liturgical books of 1962?
Click to expand...
I won’t comment as to the pastoral benefit of an indult for the former Mass rite or even an Ordinariate for those who might use it.

But on the issue of the Eastern Churches, I think those Catholics of the East would be a little insulted by this (David??). They see themselves not just as a liturgical option that some Catholics might select, but a full and enduring community.
 
40.png
katherine2:
I won’t comment as to the pastoral benefit of an indult for the former Mass rite or even an Ordinariate for those who might use it.

But on the issue of the Eastern Churches, I think those Catholics of the East would be a little insulted by this (David??). They see themselves not just as a liturgical option that some Catholics might select, but a full and enduring community.
Click to expand...
But if Traditional Catholics say that[see bolded]… we’re called schimatic. If we feel insulted by that type of remark… It’s off with your head, schismatic SSPXial Rad Trad
 
40.png
terrcatholic:
Shanon, if I understand what I have read correctly, Franciscum is not for the TLM, and I dont think Mr. S is that kind of person to try to egg him on, he is just saying how she and many feel. Re-read some of his past writings, which have been very very emotional and pro-Novus Ordo. To say that you are uppity becase you like the culture and history associated with a Mass that was the mass for centuries I think is a little out of line and gives the traditionalists fuel for their fire, as that is what they say to me as they say that I cant have it both ways, etc etc
Click to expand...
I happened to agree with many of the points that have been made by Franciscum. I have had clashes with some of the Rad-Trads, and they are the ones who go too far in my opinion. I agree with the comments about snobbishness because the people who pronounce that they go to the TLM do have a Protestant tendency to put everyone elses down.

I personally favour the vernacular Mass. I do not see the alleged abuses that have been reported on a variety of web sites. I think that what is often termed as “abuse” is a matter of perception. Yes, there have been clashes in my own parish about the Mass, and the Church in general. I am not a liberal, neither am I a Traditionalist. People sometimes make mistakes and I think there are times when Traditionalists need to exercise a higher level of tolerance.

MaggieOH
 
What are you talking about? This is my whole point. People who go to the Latin mass also see themselves as a full and enduring community. We are NOT just another liturgical option, but rather are a community of people who have a strong devotion and attachment to the liturgical books of 1962. Go and visit any Tridentine-only Parish and you will of course notice this.

If my comment can in anyway be construed so as to insult Eastern Rite Catholics, then I apologize because I have nothing but the highest respect for Eastern Rite Catholics. I attend Eastern Liturgies on a fairly regular basis (Ukranian, Melkite, Syro-Malankar, and Armenian), and have enjoyed all of my experiences at Eastern-Rite Churches (which is much more than I can say about my experiences at the average Novus Ordo parish.)

Why then can’t there be a Tridentine Rite? Is there a valid reason, or do you just like to have us Traditionalists around so that you can call us schismatics, and excummicate us from time to time?

I have yet to hear a valid reason as to why we can not have a Tridentine Rite with our own Bishops, Priests, and Churches. Only a Tridentine Rite will guarantee the continuation of the Latin mass for our children and our children’s children.
40.png
katherine2:
I won’t comment as to the pastoral benefit of an indult for the former Mass rite or even an Ordinariate for those who might use it.

But on the issue of the Eastern Churches, I think those Catholics of the East would be a little insulted by this (David??). They see themselves not just as a liturgical option that some Catholics might select, but a full and enduring community.
Click to expand...
 
I have not read the entire thread but here is my take:

Ok, the attack on traditionalist are kind of stupid and may actually be harmful in the long run.

First of all it will not help at all if you keep calling traditional Catholics, schismatic, integrist, rad-trads, sedevacantist, etc.
Nor it is good to call names the other side, neo-cons, etc. Enough with the stupid name calling, Wait, are suppose to be on one side?

The SSPX has many problems, but they are not a part of the current mainstream Catholicism. Most parishes have lost their flocks to contraception, abuses in the liturgy, abortion, sodomy, etc. Before seeing all the problems of the SSPX, why don’t you guys look at the problems at your own parishes and diocese. Especially when many of current priests, bishops are presiding over the decline of the Catholic Culture here in the U.S and the other parts of the world.

Do not judge people too harshly if they go to an SSPX parish, they probally have a sense of problems around them. IF they have children and are responsible to raise their little souls, their first choice should be any parish that teaches the Catholic faith, but if there are not any of those parishes around, do not be harsh on them, if they go to an SSPX. Put yourselves into the parents shoes.

IF people go to an SSPX chapel out of arrogrance, maybe God will judge harshly, but if they go out of devotion to the 1962 Missal or they are concerned about their children little souls, God only knows.

It is best if we showed charity to one another, otherwise we all look like dumb fools and just a reminder, you all could be your own worst enemies.

ok, continue to chew each other up.
 
40.png
Iohannes:
I have not read the entire thread but here is my take:

Ok, the attack on traditionalist are kind of stupid and may actually be harmful in the long run.

First of all it will not help at all if you keep calling traditional Catholics, schismatic, integrist, rad-trads, sedevacantist, etc.
Nor it is good to call names the other side, neo-cons, etc. Enough with the stupid name calling, Wait, are suppose to be on one side?..
Click to expand...
ok, continue to chew each other up.
Very well said.
Now, was dat da bell for the 4th round I heard?
http://www.geocities.com/shangrala_shangy/Hulk3.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top