People who do not like traditional Catholicism

[Deacon_Ed_B]

I’m still surprised **at the intolerance shown to orthodox Catholics & the fear of the Latin Mass **that I’ve found here. I really didn’t think that these forums would be like that.

What you have seen is not an intolerance of and fear of the Latin Mass, but rather a reaction by those, including myself, who do not like being told that because we may prefer the Novus Ordo Mass that somehow we are not as Catholic or that we are not as traditional and orthodox as those who prefer the Latin Mass. Our mass preference, whether it be for the Latin Mass or Novus Ordo has nothing to do with our Catholicity. It is simply a preference for a particular form of worship, each of which is equally good and efficacious.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Saint_Gemma, I think you will find the answer in your signature.
I’m not offended by it, nor do I think there is anything wrong with it. But my point is, many equate the word traditionalist with the words disobedience, schismatic, etc. Again, not saying you do.

Also, many are comfortable with the way things are in their own parishes, and see traditionalists as a threat, even though they are not. I attended a Saturday evening vigil Mass last week at a parish I had not been to before. It was an NO Pentecost vigil Mass. The priest began the Opening Prayer, stopped after the first few words, and said " Instead of this, let’s sing a hymn of praise". The lector then immediately led the faithful. I’ll spare everyone the details of the other lector who recited the readings, but will say her choice of dress was appalling.

Now, if I had said anything to someone after Mass about this, being a guest at this parish, I’m sure I would have been seen as a trouble maker. Like I said, some are simply comfortable with whatever their priest does and allows, right or wrong.

How do you know, if the priest was changing liturgical form, that it was a true Mass? True Mass meaning, was the bread and wine truly consecrated and the form changed into the Body and Blood of Christ?
I know that we are forbidden by Jesus from attacking a priest, but what you say happened could have made the whole “Mass?” not a Mass at all.
I do hear about horrible transgressions performed in some parishes, and I hear also the excuses given by the priests for them.
My point is this: other than prayer, isn’t there anything else we are called to do?

 

[HOPEFUL_IN_UK]

Would someone please explain to me why so many people who do not like traditional Catholicism frequent this sub-forum? Are they trying to convert traditional Catholics to less traditional Catholicism? I can understand trying to convert someone who thinks that the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite is illicit or invalid, but why would one want to convert someone who just prefers the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite? Most of the people who I know who prefer the Extraordinary Form would be happy liturgically if every Mass was just celebrated sans liturgical abuses. Why is this a bad thing?

Aside from the sandalistas, I don’t think many of the people who post here actually dislike traditional Catholicism. I like it very much, myself. I wish there had never been a revision of the Liturgy, that Catechesis was still strong, etc. But, I know that I’m not alone in finding the extreme right scary. Things I do dislike are: antisemitism, conspiracy theories, grumpy judgementalism, and disobedience to the Pope.

 

[PrayforMallory]

But, I know that I’m not alone in finding the extreme right scary. Things I do dislike are: antisemitism, conspiracy theories, grumpy judgementalism, and disobedience to the Pope.

I don’t like those things either. I send my daughter to a Jewish summer school, where she learns about something called “Shimma.”
This is fine, because she’s being taught Catholicism, and can respect the differences without diluting her own faith. I don’t really get anti-semitism, but I’ve never really come into contact with blatant anti-semitism. The grumpy judgementalism, well, I’ve seen that everywhere, especially in non-Catholic circles. Conspiracy theories, I also don’t really care for. They are kinda nutty. Disobedience, well, that’s not really necessary in any way these days (not that it necessarily ever was).

 

[ethelzguy]

What you have seen is not an intolerance of and fear of the Latin Mass, but rather a reaction by those, including myself, who do not like being told that because we may prefer the Novus Ordo Mass that somehow we are not as Catholic or that we are not as traditional and orthodox as those who prefer the Latin Mass.

Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B.

Sometimes I think many of the complaints/arguments raised by the traditionalist camp are Red Herring, subjective complaints that can never be truly resolved, thus providing endless opportunity to complain and place themselves over the rest of us.

Discussing or debating with some of them is like praying for peace in the Middle East. Not going to do much good, but we keep trying anyway.

 

[JReducation]

There is nothing wrong with Traditional Catholicism. That being said, when you read what Reuters reported today that Bishop Fellay said in response to Romen’s invitation to reconciliation and you hear Catholics support this kind of thinking and back-talk to the Church and the Holy Father, then you get upset.

But you don’t get upset with Traditional Catholicism. You get upset with the uncooperative and arrogant attitude of people like Bishop Fellay. You get upset that some people don’t see anything wrong with inciting the laity to disobey the Pope.

You get upset with the fact that his statements have a flavor of antisemiticsm and anti-anything that is not Catholic. You wonder if he realizes that such and outright rejection of other faiths can put Catholics and other Christian’s danger in those countries where Catholicism is barely tolerated, because now they have an excuse for thinking more hatefully about the Catholic Church. I for one get upset whenever someone puts the lives of others in danger unnecessarily. Those who fail to see this, make me feel very uncomfortable. This is not Traditional Catholicism, these are individuals interpreting Traditional Catholicism in a very dangerous manner.

I find it unreasonable when someone who is not in authority, in the Church wants to put conditions on the Church’s leadership. They begin to sound like a labor union rather than people of faith. That’s inconsistent with Traditional Catholicism. It makes Traditional Catholicism look very political, rather than spiritual, which is what it really is.

JR

 

[elts1956]

There is nothing wrong with Traditional Catholicism. That being said, when you read what Reuters reported today that Bishop Fellay said in response to Romen’s invitation to reconciliation and you hear Catholics support this kind of thinking and back-talk to the Church and the Holy Father, then you get upset.

But you don’t get upset with Traditional Catholicism. You get upset with the uncooperative and arrogant attitude of people like Bishop Fellay. You get upset that some people don’t see anything wrong with inciting the laity to disobey the Pope.

You get upset with the fact that his statements have a flavor of antisemiticsm and anti-anything that is not Catholic. You wonder if he realizes that such and outright rejection of other faiths can put Catholics and other Christian’s danger in those countries where Catholicism is barely tolerated, because now they have an excuse for thinking more hatefully about the Catholic Church. I for one get upset whenever someone puts the lives of others in danger unnecessarily. Those who fail to see this, make me feel very uncomfortable. This is not Traditional Catholicism, these are individuals interpreting Traditional Catholicism in a very dangerous manner.

I find it unreasonable when someone who is not in authority, in the Church wants to put conditions on the Church’s leadership. They begin to sound like a labor union rather than people of faith. That’s inconsistent with Traditional Catholicism. It makes Traditional Catholicism look very political, rather than spiritual, which is what it really is.

JR

Hi JR. Where can I read what Fthr. Fellay said today in response to the Vatican? Thanks. Elaine

 

[WILKM]

Great post JR. I couldn’t agree with you more.

 

[CradleCath]

I don’t know the answer to this question but I am also perplexed that there are some Catholics out there who dislike anything that is even remotely traditional.

This is how I define traditional Catholicism:

• A love of the Tridentine Mass without questioning the validity of the OF.
• Fondness for traditional spirituality such as the Rosary
• A strong devotion to the Eucharist and the Mother of God

Why would anyone oppose such things. Traditional Catholicism is true Catholicism that flourished for thousands of years. The Saints became Saints through the practice of traditional Catholicism.

In fact, I view conservatives as traditionalists because they basically hold the same views as traditionalists without necessarily prefering the Tridentine Mass. The only people who seem opposed to traditional/conservative Catholicism are liberal dissenters who want to change the Church to suit the times. They should join the Anglican Church. It would suit them better because they have the woman priests, they allow contraception and they also condone homosexuality to the extent that they have practicing homosexual Bishops.

Thank you. I see that a few Traditional/conservative/orthodox…whatever the latest label is…have joined this thread & I don’t have to continue to “hold the fort” alone.

What I find odd is that I posted almost the same description (see bold part of your post) of what I call liberal Catholics, earlier in the thread. I mentioned the same thee issues: homosexual practices, contraception & women priests, but added one more…abortion. My own personal “litmus test” to deduce liberalism within the Catholic Church is this: If one doesn’t adher to Church teaching on these issues, IMO., they are liberal Catholics.

Surprise, surprise :whacky: no one has mentioned how they feel about these issues. They’ve criticized my messages & me…but NOT ONE has said,

**I’m liberal & I believe that abortion is an intrinsic evil,

**I’m liberal & believe that gay sex is disordered & wrong & that homosexuals should live a life of celibacy.

**NOT ONE has said that Pope Paul’s prophesies concerning a world that has accepted artificial contraception as God’s Will HAVE materialized.

Perhaps they’ll reply to your post differently than they did to mine. One can always hope!

 

[CradleCath]

What you have seen is not an intolerance of and fear of the Latin Mass, but rather a reaction by those, including myself, **who do not like being told that because we may prefer the Novus Ordo Mass that somehow we are not as Catholic or that we are not as traditional and orthodox as those who prefer the Latin Mass. **Our mass preference, whether it be for the Latin Mass or Novus Ordo has nothing to do with our Catholicity. It is simply a preference for a particular form of worship, each of which is equally good and efficacious.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B.

Yes it is. And where were you told that “you are not as good a Catholic” as those who attend the TLM?

 

[wanner47]

Yes it is. And where were you told that “you are not as good a Catholic” as those who attend the TLM?

I’ve seen others say that very thing in this very forum.

 

[JReducation]

I too have seen it implied that a person is less Catholic or less reverent or is lacking in spiritual growth. This comes thru when someone says to you that the OF is somehow lacking compared to the EF. That insinuates that the person who prefes the OF is accepting something that is less than perfect, which suggests that he or she leans toward mediocre Catholicism. That’s very offensive and goes against what the Motu Proprio says.

JR

 

[Ghoti]

OK, I’ll subject myself to the litmus of liberalism/conservatism:

I grew up with the vernacular Mass. I was born into (and have had all my Sacraments so far in) the post-Vatican II Church. I have never attended a Latin Mass because 1. it was never offered in my former Archdiocese and 2. I haven’t gotten around to going to other than my parish for Mass. Thus, I have no opinion on the Latin Mass, other than I would very much like to experience it. My only experiences with Traditional Catholicism before I joined these fora were:

1. 
   *]mailouts from Fr Gruner
   *]interviews with Mel Gibson
   
   I am Canadian (I know that makes me a dyed-in-the-wool pinko to many people right off the bat).
   I signed up as a member of the Liberal Party of Canada (I may very well still be, as I have not formally severed from them). I did so, however, to support the nomination of a staunchly pro-life candidate (as in it was a major plank in her platform).
   I was educated by laypeople in the Catholic school system until grade 6, except for a half-year I went to a Pentecostal school. For grades 7-9 it was the Christian Brothers; for 10-11, the Jesuits.
   I am pro-life. Abortion is murder. No ands, ifs, or buts.
   I believe that homosexuality is disordered.
   I believe that artificial contraception is sinful. I also believe that any “contraceptive” methods that affect a fertilized egg (such as preventing implantation etc) are in fact abortifacients, and use thereof constitutes murder.
   Although I have met a few women who I believe under other circumstances would have made good priests, I accept without reservation Pope John-Paul’s decree that the Church has no authority to ordain women.
   I do not reject out of hand the notion of married priests (provided they were married before ordination), as the matter is disciplinary and not dogmatic, and there is also the example of the Eastern Churches. I do, however, accept that, except in a few circumstances, the Latin Rite does not permit a married clergy (other than the permanent diaconate), and it is up to the Holy Father, not me, to decide otherwise.
   I do not believe that the Church is a democracy. I believe it to be a benevolent dictatorship, a theocracy, the truest example of Divine Right (if I am not misusing the term).
   I accept the Creeds – Apostles’, Nicene, Athanasian.
   I accept His Holiness Benedict XVI as the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ. I believe that anyone who thinks there hasn’t been a pope since Pius XII wears a tinfoil mitre. Siriously.
   I believe in evolution and the Big Bang, so far. Whatever the scientific consensus is, or whatever the paradigm changes to next week. So if the scientific proof all of a sudden points to curved space or string theory or geocentricity or turtles all the way down, I go, “So that’s how it works?” and the scientists go, “More or less, as far as we can predict, yes,” and I go’ “OK. Way to go, God!”
   I would like to see the Legion of Decency return, or at least a decent (pardon the pun) orthodox equivalent. I would also like to see a return of the Index – but at lest along the line of a Roman “Cliff’s Notes” that gives the Church’s opinion on the moral acceptability of various media. Sort of like a moral “nutritional value” label.
   I don’t go to Mass and confession as often as I should. Not because I don’t believe in it, but because I’m a sinner.
   I used to receive Communion while not in a state of grace, but out of ignorance, not malice. I will not receive now if I am in need of the confessional.
   I think mantillas/veils are a good thing for whatever woman wants to wear them. If they don’t, that’s fine too.
   I believe that the standard of dress at Mass – modesty-wise – should be increased. My personal rule of thumb: cover up from collar to knee, elbow to elbow.
   I prefer gothic/Romanesque/baroque churches to the modernist/postmodernist/brutalist/whateverist ones. Fly them butresses!
   I think the Pope should dust off the Tiara and break it out on occasion (as appropriate).
   I do not believe that the Jews have a “collective guilt” for the death of Jesus any more than the Croats have one for inventing the necktie.
   I accept EENS – altho’ how the exact mechanics of this work out, I don’t know. That’s up to God, not me.
   I don’t believe in socialism or communism. That being said, I don’t believe in libertarianism, capitalism, or fascism either.
   I believe that man has dominion over the planet, and the animals and resources on it. I also think it’s a sin to squander those resources or treat the animals inhumanely.
   I don’t believe in population control or eugenics. I do believe in the right to die as God wills, but not through assisted suicide or euthanasia.
   I believe cloning a human is an abomination. I believe the cloning of a human with an animal is an act of such depravity that it beggars description.
   I like incense, Gregorian chant, bells, and candles. I like pipe organs and polyphony. I also like guitars and the MQP girls’ choir singing “When A Child Is Born”.
   I prefer to receive the Eucharist from the priest rather than an EMHC. But I won’t elbow my way into another line or avoid one.
   I still normally take Communion in the hand, but I’m slowly changing my mind on it.
   I think you can be friends with a priest.
   I bring my Rosary to Mass. I don’t pray it during Mass, but I do like holding it for some reason.
   I believe that from far off, God sends.
   I don’t believe there is necessarily anyone in Hell.
   I believe that of some people I know, if they ain’t in Heaven, ain’t no hope for me.
   I believe God’s capacity to forgive is greater than our ability to confound His will. I also believe that, oddly enough, those who deserve mercy the least are the ones who need it the most.
   
   So…did I leave anything out?

 

[Ghoti]

Actually, ignore my previous post. I did not realize how long it was!

That’s what happens when I don’t take my meds.

Sorry!

 

[LilyM]

I do not believe that the Jews have a “collective guilt” for the death of Jesus any more than the Croats have one for inventing the necktie.

Being of Croatian stock I’ve once or twice before been twitted for us having invented the necktie - but collective guilt? Seriously!

 

[Ghoti]

Being of Croatian stock I’ve once or twice before been twitted for us having invented the necktie - but collective guilt? Seriously!

Yeah, tongue planted firmly in cheek for that one. But I believe it’s silly to blame a people for the action of a few some thousands of years ago.

The only collective guilt I believe in is original sin.

 

[elts1956]

Thank you. I see that a few Traditional/conservative/orthodox…whatever the latest label is…have joined this thread & I don’t have to continue to “hold the fort” alone.

What I find odd is that I posted almost the same description (see bold part of your post) of what I call liberal Catholics, earlier in the thread. I mentioned the same thee issues: homosexual practices, contraception & women priests, but added one more…abortion. My own personal “litmus test” to deduce liberalism within the Catholic Church is this: If one doesn’t adher to Church teaching on these issues, IMO., they are liberal Catholics.

Surprise, surprise :whacky: no one has mentioned how they feel about these issues. They’ve criticized my messages & me…but NOT ONE has said,

**I’m liberal & I believe that abortion is an intrinsic evil,

**I’m liberal & believe that gay sex is disordered & wrong & that homosexuals should live a life of celibacy.

**NOT ONE has said that Pope Paul’s prophesies concerning a world that has accepted artificial contraception as God’s Will HAVE materialized.

Perhaps they’ll reply to your post differently than they did to mine. One can always hope!

Hello CC. What post are you talking about? I must have missed it??? I can’t decide if I am liberal in that I uphold Vatican II, or I am conservative in that I hold to the teachings of the church such as:

A love of the Tridentine Mass without questioning the validity of the OF. Although I haven’t been to a Tridentine Mass since the late 50s.

Fondness for traditional spirituality such as the Rosary. Love it just love it.

A strong devotion to the Eucharist and the Mother of God. You betcha.

Strongly abhorrent of abortion of any kind.

 

[CradleCath]

I too have seen it implied that a person is less Catholic or less reverent or is lacking in spiritual growth. This comes thru when someone says to you that the OF is somehow lacking compared to the EF. **That insinuates that the person who prefes the OF is accepting something that is less than perfect, which suggests that he or she leans toward mediocre Catholicism. ** That’s very offensive and goes against what the Motu Proprio says.

JR

I’m sorry if I sound unsympathetic, but to let someone else determine whether or no you are a “good Catholic” judging same by which Mass you attend is absurd. It’s been my experience that most liberals attend the OF. Mass, but, as I said in an earlier post…most Catholics I know, period, attend the Novus Ordo. One would have to know much more than your Mass preference to determine your “Catholicity”. One would have to know the degree of your fidelity to the teachings of the Church to determine what kind of Catholic you are.

BTW., I notice you still have not replied concerning your belief

The evils of abortion, gay sex, women priests & ABC??

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

I’ve read through some of the posts on this thread and there is something that no one seems to understand.

Traditioanal Catholicism is not simply a preference for the Traditional Mass, and (for most of us) a dislike for the Novus Ordo. It goes much deeper.

The truth is, the Traditional Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass are simply the visible expression of two different forms of Catholicism.

The Traditional Mass is the visible expression of Catholicism as it was tauth by the Popes from day one, right up to Vatican II.

The Novus Ordo Mass is the visible expression of a liberalised and modernized form of Catholicism, whcih could be called “Catholicism light”.

For those who are willing to accept the truth, and I don’t expect that there will be many, this is what has happened.

For about 200 years, the Church began to condemn a new error that emerged. This new error was not simply one heresy (the denial of this or that doctrine), but was, as Pope Pius X said “the synthesis of all heresies”. This heresy, which is known by the names of liberalism and modernism, undermined, not only the nature of the Church itself, but virtually all dogmas, by introduce an error known as “evolution of doctrine” - the belief that the dogmas are not fixed, but change and evolve with the times. It also teaches that the Church itself must evolve with the times.

This erroneous and destructive way of thinking was condemned very clearly by the Pope in many encyclicals. Pope Pius X went further and excommunicated all those infected with this intellectual and heretical disease, and removed anyone even slightly tainted with it from positions of authority. When he was later congradulated for taking such measures to defendt he faith, he replied “I have not killed the beast, but only driven it underground”.

The numders of the beast grew and spread until Vatican II when they again rose to the surface and took over the Church.

For the past 40 + years they (the beast) have been remaking the Church in their own image and likeness. They have also been distorting the faith through their error of “evolution of doctrine”, which they call by the name doctrinal developement in order to deceive the unwary. The truth is evolution of doctrine is not doctrinal developement.

In one of the 40 times that Pope Pius IX condemned liberal Catholicism, he said this “Liberal Catholicism is the worst enemy of the Catholic Church”, ane he was correct. It has just about detroyed the Church in the past 40 years. We are now living in the great apostasy predicted in the Bible and by the saints. Interestingly, some of the saints actually gave the date that it woudl take place. The date was “teh second half of the 20th century”.

The New Mass is the visible expression of this liberal and ever evolving form of “Catholicism”, which is not true Catholicism.

That is the reality that many do not realize. They know that something is wrong, but have no idea what it is. However, it will become perfectly clear to those who read the encyclical letters of the Pope in which they condemn this beast.

If anyone is interested, I’ll provide them with a list of the encyclicals.

One final point: The Syllabus of Pius IX was a condemnation of the errors of the Liberals. Wtih this in mind, consider the following quote from Cardinal Ratzinger:

Cardinal Ratzinger: "If one is looking for a global diagnosis of the text [of Gaudium et spes from Vatican II], **one could say that it (along with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter-Syllabus **…

the positions taken by the Church through the initiatives of Pius IX and Pius X against the new period of History opened by the French Revolution **was to a large extent corrected **via facti. But a fundamental new document regarding relations with the world as it had been since 1789 was still lacking.

**Let us content ourselves here with stating that the text [of Gaudium et spes] plays the role of a counter-Syllabus **to the measure that it represents an attempt to officially reconcile the Church with the world as it had become after 1789.

(Les Principes de la Theologie Catholique - Esquisse et Materiaux, Paris: Tequi, 1982, pp. 426-427).

In other words, what was officially condemned as an error by the Popes on the late 19th and early 20th cneturies, was taught by Vatican II. Why? Because those whose ideology was condemned by the earlier Popes took over the Church at Vatican II. Thus we have the great apostasy that we are now living through.

“Those who have ears to hear, let them hear”.

 

[ethelzguy]

The truth is, the Traditional Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass are simply the visible expression of two different forms of Catholicism.

What a ridiculous, broad-brushed interpetation…which clearly shows the self-righteous arrogance of some rogue traditionalists.

The Masses are the visible expression of two different MASS forms, as set forth by the Holy Father.

Show me any Church teaching or document that validates your statement above.