Myth regarding Traditionalists and the “Fear” of Change

[Dan_Daly]

I’m not 100% sure how you are using “traditional” vs “Traditional”, A capital T usually means a divinely revealed Sacred Tradition- the word of God.

In the context though I think you are using Traditional for what some call “Rad Trads”- they go to the EF primarily, many homeschoool, etc, etc- there’s a stereotype. Some negative, some postive, some true, some not.

On the other hand if you are using traditional with a small t to mean someone who is orthodox and obedient to Church teaching, and does so in an OF setting. Again- lots of stereotypes here as well, true/not true/postive/negative.

If that’s your intended meaning. I think many people, myself and my family included, started off as “traditionals” and over the course of time have come to the conclusion that becoming “Traditionals” is the best actually remain traditional/orthodox.

It’s something we noticed at the Latin Mass Community we are part of from the first day we arrived. The demographics are quite interesting. You have an older group- people who were adults at the time of Vatican II. You have a younger group “first generation trads”, people under 45, who never knew the EF, grew up with the OF, and came to the EF as adults as part of a deliberate decision making process. (you also have a whole lot of 2nd generations Traditionals- all the kids! Far more per family then I’ve ever seen at another parish). What is interesting is what is missing- the baby boomers. Those who grew up during all the changes in the Mass. I have my own theories on why this demographic is nearly completely absent, but the absence in and of itself is very interesting.

(It makes me smile at myself that I see a sentence I wrote wherein the “younger group” is described as under 45. Thank you God for the blessing of our age. May we treasure whichever one we are right now. )

Pax!

 

[Melchior_1]

Traditional are those who hold true to the doctrine and dogma of the Catholic Church. Obedient and loyal to the Supreme Pontiff. As you said, “divinely revealed Sacred Tradition- the word of God”. I’m involved in the charismatic movement, and still very Traditional.

traditional is items like fasting three hours before Communion, attending Mass with the Missel of 1962, wearing veils, typically attending the EF, misc etc. ALthough I respect these practices, I don’t do some of them myself. I would not consider myself a traditionalist at all, however that doesn’t change that I am a Traditionalist.

 

[Dan_Daly]

Ok, then I misguessed as to which term you were using for which group. Switch the capitalization and my last post holds. Pax!

 

[Dan_Daly]

It’s important to note that although traditions are not the Word of God- like Traditions. The Church does not teach that traditions are bad. Far from it. When practiced with charity and a love for Christ, traditions are a very important tool that aid people in holding dear to Traditions.

So I guess if anyone asks if I’m a traditionalist or Traditionalist, I can most accurately answer…I’m a traditional Traditionalist.



Pax!

 

[The_Old_Medic]

Nobody ever called for “the eradication of the Latin Rite Identity”.

That is the problem with the so called “Traditionalists”. They see it from such a paranoid perspective.

And they do, and they HAVE, fought against change.

They want NO change at all, they want it back to 1960, when Priests were “Gods”, nobody but fanatics like myself could actually understand the words of the Mass, it was all ritual that you could do in your sleep, and nobody was required to think about anything. It was so comforting to just have the same old thing, day in and day out, week in and week out, decade in and decade out.

And the church was dying. The changes were made as the result of a Counsel of the Church, and those “traditionalists” just adamantly refused to accept the changes. They wanted it back the “Old way”, and NOTHING else would suffice.

Pope Benedict XVI had done a HORRIBLE disservice to the church by bringing back the past like he has. The next Pope will most likely have to undo Benedict’s reversions, and this will cause even more upheaval and unhappiness.

There is no human being on the face of this earth that loves the Tridentine Mass more than I do. I converted into the Church using that ritual, I LEARNED Latin so I could understand the Mass in its entirety. I especially miss the High Masses, with their glorious music, etc.

BUT, I would hate to see the church go back to that era. I wish that no Latin Mass was allowed ANYWHERE, because far too many FANATICS are demanding that it be “their way or the highway” as far as the Church is concerned. They are perverting the right to use it occasionally, and demanding that it become the norm again.

It’s frankly about time that these people get out of the 16th century, and actually enter the 21st! If they actually got their way, they would utterly destroy the church!

 

[Melchior_1]

Nobody ever called for “the eradication of the Latin Rite Identity”.

That is the problem with the so called “Traditionalists”. They see it from such a paranoid perspective.

And they do, and they HAVE, fought against change.

They want NO change at all, they want it back to 1960, when Priests were “Gods”, nobody but fanatics like myself could actually understand the words of the Mass, it was all ritual that you could do in your sleep, and nobody was required to think about anything. It was so comforting to just have the same old thing, day in and day out, week in and week out, decade in and decade out.

And the church was dying. The changes were made as the result of a Counsel of the Church, and those “traditionalists” just adamantly refused to accept the changes. They wanted it back the “Old way”, and NOTHING else would suffice.

Pope Benedict XVI had done a HORRIBLE disservice to the church by bringing back the past like he has. The next Pope will most likely have to undo Benedict’s reversions, and this will cause even more upheaval and unhappiness.

There is no human being on the face of this earth that loves the Tridentine Mass more than I do. I converted into the Church using that ritual, I LEARNED Latin so I could understand the Mass in its entirety. I especially miss the High Masses, with their glorious music, etc.

BUT, I would hate to see the church go back to that era. I wish that no Latin Mass was allowed ANYWHERE, because far too many FANATICS are demanding that it be “their way or the highway” as far as the Church is concerned. They are perverting the right to use it occasionally, and demanding that it become the norm again.

It’s frankly about time that these people get out of the 16th century, and actually enter the 21st! If they actually got their way, they would utterly destroy the church!

Eradication of the EF would have the same effect though. BXVI is trying to bridge the gap between the different factions, and we’re seeing some good fruits from that. For every SSPX or SSPV, there’s a group like the FSSP. For every comtempary wackjob there’s an orthodox Traditional group like the Companions of the Cross.

Unity through Diversity.

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

Thank you everyone for your comments and compliments. I’m glad to see what I have said did not start any arguments but rather promoted a health discussion.

The vernacular Mass does not exist because of the Second Vatican Council. That does not mean that one can conclude that it doesn’t exist legitimately. It’s true that the Council called for the retention of Latin. It’s true that HH Pope Paul VI promulgated the documents of the Second Vatican Council. However, the Holy See permitted national bishops’ conferences to determine to what extent the vernacular would be used in the Masses in their nations. Those decisions were then forwarded to the SAME Pope Paul VI, who approved (and had the authority to disapprove) those decisions. They were approved by the proper and legitimate authority and so we have the Mass in the vernacular.

Correct and I do not have a problem with this. The problem I have is when the people used the Popes approval as some sort of evidence that it’s okay to do away with and forget about Latin altogether. The Pope still wanted the priests to retain their knowledge of Latin so if the faithful requested a Mass in Latin they could supply the needs of the faithful. Sadly a majority of priests these days can’t provide a Latin Mass because they have little to no education in this area. This is because Latin was not preserved as it should have been, but I will stop there because I do not want people thinking that this is just about the Latin which it is not. It’s about the spirit of preserving the identity of our Latin Rite.

Basically I would like all Latin Catholics to adopt the same spirit the Eastern Catholics seem to be united in practicing towards their Rite which is a spirit that is open to change but a change that does not rob them of their identity.

 

[Dan_Daly]

Nobody can utterly destory the Church. Christ promised. (He didn’t promise people wouldn’t try though or that it wouldn’t get ugly- they are, and it is). Have faith!

As far as not understanding the words of the EF. I struggle with picking up the Latin much more then my wife. But I still know exactly what is being said- it’s written in English in the missal.

As far as not having to think during Mass, I’ve found the incredible SILENCE of the EF Mass, to be an enormous blessing in just this particular area. Time to ponder the awesomeness of what is happening.

I will say though, that it may sound ironic, I think the EF while it can aid you in thinking (as it has done with me), it places less of a requirement on you to think during Mass…and I think this is a good thing.

At the OF, if one does not the theology of the Mass, one can very easily miss what is happening. Depending on where you go to Church, the Holy Mass can ressemble anything from a PTA meeting to a Protestant praise and worship service. Yes, the Mass is happening- that IS the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. But it can be quite easy to miss- as evidenced by how many people GO to Mass every week and don’t believe in the true presence, never mind all those who no longer go.

At the EF, anyone Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, atheist, whatever, can sit there and watch and go WOW. They may not understand it, but it is quite clear that SOMETHING SPECIAL is going on. The sight of the Priest up on the high altar, the altar boys aiding him, the sounds, the silence, the smells, the ping of the Holy water against your face…

I hope that makes some sense.

Pax.

 

[ProVobis]

T

t

Just curious. Who made up this “T” vs “t” theology? Is this another Anglophone thing?

The Romans or early Church didn’t use small caps.

 

[TrueLight]

Pope Benedict XVI had done a HORRIBLE disservice to the church by bringing back the past like he has. The next Pope will most likely have to undo Benedict’s reversions, and this will cause even more upheaval and unhappiness.

There is no human being on the face of this earth that loves the Tridentine Mass more than I do. I converted into the Church using that ritual, I LEARNED Latin so I could understand the Mass in its entirety. I especially miss the High Masses, with their glorious music, etc.

BUT, I would hate to see the church go back to that era. I wish that no Latin Mass was allowed ANYWHERE, because far too many FANATICS are demanding that it be “their way or the highway” as far as the Church is concerned. They are perverting the right to use it occasionally, and demanding that it become the norm again.

It’s frankly about time that these people get out of the 16th century, and actually enter the 21st! If they actually got their way, they would utterly destroy the church!

You know, traditionalists have to hem and haw in stating our beliefs about the EF and OF, lest we be accused of pitting the EF against the OF.

But is it okay to say the Pope has done a HORRIBLE disservice and that the Latin mass should be banned everywhere?

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

Nobody ever called for “the eradication of the Latin Rite Identity”.

I know they didn’t which is my point. Sadly fanatics on both sides have their own interests at heart and not the Church’s.

BUT, I would hate to see the church go back to that era. I wish that no Latin Mass was allowed ANYWHERE, because far too many FANATICS are demanding that it be “their way or the highway” as far as the Church is concerned. They are perverting the right to use it occasionally, and demanding that it become the norm again.

It’s frankly about time that these people get out of the 16th century, and actually enter the 21st! If they actually got their way, they would utterly destroy the church!

Yea because this sounds nothing like the spirit of eradication I was talking about.

 

[TrueLight]

it was all ritual that you could do in your sleep, and nobody was required to think about anything. It was so comforting to just have the same old thing, day in and day out, week in and week out, decade in and decade out.

I frankly don’t see the difference when it comes to thinking or not thinking. It depends on your disposition.

I have been to enough OF masses to see that some people respond like robots, while some think about what is happening.

You can easily reply in a flat, monotonous tone:

“And also with you”
“May the Lord receive the sacrifice from thy hands, to the praise and glory of His own name”
“I confess….”

Both the EF and OF are ritualistic. It doesn’t matter whether it is being said in English or Latin. If one’s heart is not in it, then it is vain repetition.

 

[ProVobis]

As far as not having to think during Mass, I’ve found the incredible SILENCE of the EF Mass, to be an enormous blessing in just this particular area. Time to ponder the awesomeness of what is happening.

Good thoughts.

From Matthew 6

5 Et cum oratis, non eritis sicut hypocritæ qui amant in synagogis et in angulis platearum stantes orare, ut videantur ab hominibus : amen dico vobis, receperunt mercedem suam. 6 Tu autem cum oraveris, intra in cubiculum tuum, et clauso ostio, ora Patrem tuum in abscondito : et Pater tuus, qui videt in abscondito, reddet tibi. 7 Orantes autem, nolite multum loqui, sicut ethnici, putant enim quod in multiloquio suo exaudiantur. 8 Nolite ergo assimilari eis : scit enim Pater vester, quid opus sit vobis, antequam petatis eum.

5 And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites, that love to stand and pray in the synagogues and corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men: Amen I say to you, they have received their reward. 6 But you when you shall pray, enter into your chamber, and having shut the door, pray to your Father in secret, and your father who sees in secret will repay you. 7 And when you are praying, speak not much, as the heathens. For they think that in their much speaking they may be heard. 8 Be not therefore like them for your Father knows what is needful for you, before you ask him.

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

I frankly don’t see the difference when it comes to thinking or not thinking. It depends on your disposition.

I have been to enough OF masses to see that some people respond like robots, while some think about what is happening.

You can easily reply in a flat, monotonous tone:

“And also with you”
“May the Lord receive the sacrifice from thy hands, to the praise and glory of His own name”
“I confess….”

Both the EF and OF are ritualistic. It doesn’t matter whether it is being said in English or Latin. If one’s heart is not in it, then it is vain repetition.

Exactly!

 

[jam070406]

I frankly don’t see the difference when it comes to thinking or not thinking. It depends on your disposition.

I have been to enough OF masses to see that some people respond like robots, while some think about what is happening.

You can easily reply in a flat, monotonous tone:

“And also with you”
“May the Lord receive the sacrifice from thy hands, to the praise and glory of His own name”
“I confess….”

Both the EF and OF are ritualistic. It doesn’t matter whether it is being said in English or Latin. If one’s heart is not in it, then it is vain repetition.

This is exactly how I feel. I find the OF to be even more lifeless and robotic.

 

[ProVobis]

The Pope still wanted the priests to retain their knowledge of Latin so if the faithful requested a Mass in Latin they could supply the needs of the faithful.

Okay but I don’t think it should be a matter of request. The Latin Rite Mass (both forms) is in Latin. The Church doesn’t suppress its own language. That would be like France banning French.

 

[Melchior_1]

Just curious. Who made up this “T” vs “t” theology? Is this another Anglophone thing?

The Romans or early Church didn’t use small caps.

I lifted it form Keating and other apologists. When mentioning “Sacred Tradition” and “traditions of men”, they emphasized the use of letters to show the differences. It’s sort of like how there’s god and God.

I’m fluent in English and Redneck English, so I’m not sure how it works in other languages.

 

[Dan_Daly]

Just curious. Who made up this “T” vs “t” theology? Is this another Anglophone thing?

The Romans or early Church didn’t use small caps.

It’s the method used in the English translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to distinguish between traditions that are the Word of God and traditions which are not.

Traditions, with a capital T, are the Word of God. Sacred Tradition. Sacred Scripture (the Bible) is also the Word of God.

traditions, with a lower case t, are not the Word of God. An example would be the devotion of the stations of the cross. This was not revealed to the Church directly from God. It’s not inerrant.

Traditions can not change. traditions can. (The capitaliziation convention DOES get rather annoying and sometimes confusing when you want to start a sentence with a non-sacred tradition)

Another example:

Celibate Priests- tradition. This can change. It’s not an absolute given by God. Actually, there are some married Latin Rite Catholic priests around the world right now as I type this. That’s doesn’t mean the tradition of celibacy is without merit and cannot lead one to holiness and virtue. It can and does.

All male Priesthood- Tradition. This can not change. Not the Pope doesn’t want it to change. Not we’d have to call a council to change it. IT CAN NOT CHANGE. It’s impossible. Just as the Gospel According to St. John can’t become non-divinely inspired tomorrow, the Tradition of the all male priesthood can not change either.

I hope that explains things. If you are from a different country/culture, how do you differentiate between the two?

Pax.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m not sure how it works in other languages.

It’s the Latin alphabet I was referring to. The lower case wasn’t developed until the Middle Ages so I wonder how the ancients would have distinguished God vs god. It looks like the early Church had no small-t tradition.

traditions, with a lower case t, are not the Word of God. An example would be the devotion of the stations of the cross. This was not revealed to the Church directly from God. It’s not inerrant.

Traditions can not change. traditions can. (The capitaliziation convention DOES get rather annoying and sometimes confusing when you want to start a sentence with a non-sacred tradition)

So then “tradition” (with a lower-case) is as derogatory as “modernism?” Is there are a comparable “Modernism” vs “modernism” ?

 

[Melchior_1]

It’s the Latin alphabet I was referring to. The lower case wasn’t developed until the Middle Ages so I wonder how the ancients would have distinguished God vs god. It looks like the early Church had no small-t tradition.

They likely did have small-t tradition, I just don’t know what it would be called. Practices? Disciplines? Customs? After all, they lifted some of the stuff from the Jews and discarded others (thank you Jesus, for letting us have bacon!).

Now that I think about it, this was one of the roots of the Paul vs Peter mini-conflict had, wasn’t it? Peter thought that they needed to keep some of the old ways and Paul was like “hey, if YOU want to do those, that’s fine. But it isn’t essential”. I imagine that early Christians could have kept on being kosher as a “traditional” devotional practice, but eating bacon was totally legit.

He’s not saying that traditional practices is derogatory, he’s saying they aren’t essential for our Salvation (like Sacred Tradition is).