S
Spiller
Guest
Indeed. One need not necessarily prefer to the EF over the OF to be a “traditionalist.” To suggest one must is absurd.
- Status
S
Spiller
Guest
So very true…
H
HashemEchad
Guest
I mostly hang out on the Non-Catholic Religions forum, since I’m a non-Catholic. But half my family is/was at least nominally Catholic, and before they all left the church (1970s), they adhered to traditional Catholicism. Hence, that is really the only form of the religion I am familiar with.
If I’m anything, I’d be a Novus ordo basher!
I admire the grandeur and beauty of the Tridentine Latin Mass, and actually attended a few back in the 1970s (ORCM and SSPX auspices.)
P
palmas85
Guest
I think there are very few who equate all the worlds evils with progressives and liberals.
L
LilyM
Guest
Shall we settle for saying ‘all the evils in the Church’ instead?
S
Spiller
Guest
Take a closer look on this forum.
C
CradleCath
Guest
I have wondered the same thing, myself. There are so many threads in this sub-forum that appear to be solely for the purpose of bashing & belittling the TLM Mass & it’s theology. One would think that someone who embraced the Novus Ordo would just ignore the Mass of the Ages & it’s adherents. Not so, here. It seems as if they are almost afraid of the TLM.
Is it because they fear that this Mass will become the standard for our Church again? Do they worry that we’ll “go back” to calling a sin a SIN…or…receiving the Body & Blood of Christ while actually kneeling? Perhaps it’s the blending of the line between clergy & laity that they fear losing. Maybe, they live in horror of the possibility that their “jobs” in the Sanctuary might be on the line? I don’t know, but there are sure a lot of threads in the Traditional Catholic sub-forum that are anti-Tridentine Mass.
E
ethelzguy
Guest
I think you must first identify/define “traditional Catholicism”.
What goes on here doesn’t exactly fit the CAF sub-forum title, now does it?
I am a traditional Catholic. I pray, pay, and obey. I do not criticize my clergy on spritual/liturgical matters.
I believe in, and appreciate plenary indulgences, altar servers wearing surplices and cassocks, incense, bells, novenas, First Friday/Perpetual Adoration, Holy Thursday processions, May Crownings, and on and on and on.
I do not go to Mass to critique my priest, or the music, or the worthiness of Communion of my fellow attendees.
We have so many wonderful traditions that are SO taken for granted. Some are so busy worrying about whether the priest elevates the host at consecration to their liking, that they lose what they truly came for.
It is really sad. Some come here to discuss our traditions. but, 9 times out of ten, the thread dissolves into some sort of criticism or bash of the Church. Heck, most threads in this subforum START out to criticize and bash.
I pray that God will be more loving and charitable to some of the posters here, that said posters are toward his Church.
K
kristie_m
Guest
May not be worth much, but I thought I’d add my two cents. I suspect that much of the bashing that goes on is in response to the bashing of the NO. Yes, there are abuses everywhere, but I see time and again that the abuses are being blamed on the NO, and the “spirit of Vatican 2”. For those of us that prefer the ordinary form, it would seem we are often under attack.
Personally, I get a little frustrated–not because I think traditionalism is a bad thing, or that there’s no place for the TLM. It can be quite beautiful. But it’s not for everyone. Imagine if Jesus refused to meet us where we are. If He only spoke to the “most reverent” I suspect our church would be much smaller.
I’m not suggesting that we take it to extremes. I’ve seen some liturgies that are completely unrecognizable as a Mass. But to suggest (and I’ve seen it done!) that we should do away with the NO altogether is a bit rash in my mind.
As for why they come to the traditionalist forums, well, I can offer a couple of possibilities. One is the desire some have of proving their way is right, or perhaps the poster in question is just a glutton for punishment.
I’ve seen some things done in my own church that would have some traditionalists up in arms, screaming “Liturgical Abuse!!”, and yet they were done with great reverence, and with the intent to draw God’s people closer to Him. While it might be unusual, I have a hard time finding anything wrong with that. My parish also offers weekly reconciliation, adoration and devotions to Mary. We can’t be all bad.
Personally, I get a little frustrated–not because I think traditionalism is a bad thing, or that there’s no place for the TLM. It can be quite beautiful. But it’s not for everyone. Imagine if Jesus refused to meet us where we are. If He only spoke to the “most reverent” I suspect our church would be much smaller.
I’m not suggesting that we take it to extremes. I’ve seen some liturgies that are completely unrecognizable as a Mass. But to suggest (and I’ve seen it done!) that we should do away with the NO altogether is a bit rash in my mind.
As for why they come to the traditionalist forums, well, I can offer a couple of possibilities. One is the desire some have of proving their way is right, or perhaps the poster in question is just a glutton for punishment.
I’ve seen some things done in my own church that would have some traditionalists up in arms, screaming “Liturgical Abuse!!”, and yet they were done with great reverence, and with the intent to draw God’s people closer to Him. While it might be unusual, I have a hard time finding anything wrong with that. My parish also offers weekly reconciliation, adoration and devotions to Mary. We can’t be all bad.
E
eelpis
Guest
I think the problem is that some so called traditionalists lack the virtue of charity, people get annoyed and I cannot blame them. Catholicism is traditional. There is nothing that the Church teaches now that is different from what it did prior to Vatican II. The disciplinary customs have changed a lot though and I think that’s the crux of the matter. People long for the devotions of the Church such as the rosary, adoration, the way of the cross and devotions to particular saints, there is no Catholic culture today and perhaps there never will be again, alas.
G
gavanhe
Guest
It is related to the liberalism which has infected all our catholic structures ie. seminaries, universities, convents, schools and parishes since Vatican II. We can only hope that the drive for modernism is well intentioned but I personally struggle with that belief.
The liberalism that has infected the church continues unabated and it is up to us to continue to hold the line and be the beacon of light.
In the end truth will win.
I believe that these forums serve a significant function in leading others to that truth.
Gerry
The liberalism that has infected the church continues unabated and it is up to us to continue to hold the line and be the beacon of light.
In the end truth will win.
I believe that these forums serve a significant function in leading others to that truth.
Gerry
P
palmas85
Guest
Thus forum is not about all of the worlds problems
B
brigid12
Guest
I’m a convert and you’ll certainly not be bashed by me!!! One of the reasons that led to my converting was my traditional beliefs. And btw, I really agree with you on having the ability to go to confession any day of the week without calling a priest to make an appointment and so losing privacy.
From what I’ve seen around where I live (and it probably differs some in different areas) the reasons for being super anti-Traditional Catholicism are 1.) a fear of Latin and a lot of devotions (by those who otherwise feel they know intellectually all about the Catholic Church and are often either converts or reverts), or 2.) preferring liberal/progressive theology so “turning up their nose” at Traditional Catholicism as brainless (some of those could come onto this sub-forum and see just how much thought and learning there is here
), or 3.) seeing it as divisive (possibly those are unaware that they may be propounding a false ecuminism), and 4.) human beings normal fear of change (the NO, with abuses, as been mostly the only thing available for over 40 years and more than some people have been living).palmas85 - the church in that link is gorgeous! St. Patrick’s in NYC is the other gorgeous Catholic church I’ve seen in the US.
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
There term “Traditional” and “Traditionalist” seem to cover a wide and expansive multitude of perspectives.
I oppose denigration of the ordinary form while conceding that it is in need of some correction. For not taking the most strident anti-OF, pro-EF stances, I have been called “anti-traditionalist”.
On a similar note for opposing the rhetoric of some who are militantly anti-OF (up to and including claiming the OF to be invalid), I have been called “anti-traditionalist”…
But the thing of it is, I am not certain I am comfortable with the appropriation of “traditional” to only folks who have preference for the 1962 Mass. At times it also, in turn, means a predelection for a certain ritual form and a rejection of the Pauline rite or the creation of a false dichotomy of "Well he is novus ordo, not traditional".
(For the record I am Greek Catholic who only occasionally attends Mass in the Roman rite on weekdays - between a low-church lunchtime Pauline rite Mass, a Dominican parish that chants and uses communion rails, and a Tridentine parish depending upon my schedule on a weekday.)
I like traditional practices - love them really. But I fear I get mis-labeled an anti-traditionalist (wrongly!) when I speak up to say the Ordinary Form is OK, and folks who attend that aren’t automatically deserving the distinction of being “non-traditional” over that alone. There are some matters where being a “cafeteria catholic” is acceptable when it comes to picking and choosing some ways to pray…
I oppose denigration of the ordinary form while conceding that it is in need of some correction. For not taking the most strident anti-OF, pro-EF stances, I have been called “anti-traditionalist”.
On a similar note for opposing the rhetoric of some who are militantly anti-OF (up to and including claiming the OF to be invalid), I have been called “anti-traditionalist”…
But the thing of it is, I am not certain I am comfortable with the appropriation of “traditional” to only folks who have preference for the 1962 Mass. At times it also, in turn, means a predelection for a certain ritual form and a rejection of the Pauline rite or the creation of a false dichotomy of "Well he is novus ordo, not traditional".
(For the record I am Greek Catholic who only occasionally attends Mass in the Roman rite on weekdays - between a low-church lunchtime Pauline rite Mass, a Dominican parish that chants and uses communion rails, and a Tridentine parish depending upon my schedule on a weekday.)
I like traditional practices - love them really. But I fear I get mis-labeled an anti-traditionalist (wrongly!) when I speak up to say the Ordinary Form is OK, and folks who attend that aren’t automatically deserving the distinction of being “non-traditional” over that alone. There are some matters where being a “cafeteria catholic” is acceptable when it comes to picking and choosing some ways to pray…
R
rwoehmke
Guest
Traditionalists seem to place an inordinate amount of attention on external practices. There seems to be many undercurrents of anger running through the mindset. They often seem judgmental of others who don’t share their opinion or are perceived as not being visibilly “holy” enough. /QUOTE]
I have edited Sarpedon’s post quite a bit to get at a couple of nuggets that seem to pertain to “Traditionalists” in my parish. That being said, I come to this forum because I am old enough to remember an awful lot of pre-Vatican II going back to about the mid 40’s and actually still hold with most of the basic Catholic things I was taught and learned from 16 years of Catholic education. I do not care for the TLM as it was pre-Vatican II. I would probably accept the last re-work before we went full bore into the NO of Paul VI. When properly celebrated I like the NO.
The one thing that most bothers me about the fora is not what happens on the Traditional Forum, but in some of the others where I pick up a sense that some members prefer a Faith that seems to me more focused on sin, abuses, a static way of viewing Scripture, problems with accepting parts of the CCC, etc. than on the positive ways of growing in Love with our Lord and in knowledge of our Faith. What I best liked about Vatican II was the shift from seeing people as hopelessly mired in sin to one of hope for a better world and a positive Church. Unfortunately the societal changes that took place in the mid sixties and seventies battered that hope so badly that we as a country and a Church have yet to recover.
Another of my disappointments is that we lost a lot of our sense of reverence, many of our communal devotions like Our Lady of Perpetual Help devotions and the Friday evening Way of the Cross, traditional hymns and music that many of us could sing well and the list could go on. Maybe the Traditional forum feels more like “home” to me than the others.
C
CradleCath
Guest
:bowdown: I salute you for this post.
I
I_Believe
Guest
Ah, but there is a thriving Catholic culture. No one is stopping Catholics from embracing traditional Catholic Spitituality. I have access to everything you say we long for. We have a Church here in town that has it all. The remains of two Saints, Perpetual Adoration Chapel, both forms of the Mass, May Procession, and much more. And the doors are never locked.
Trouble is, myself included until recently, that many spend more time arguing about Catholicism than practicing it.
The Church can’t help those who won’t help themselves.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
a) They see a provocative thread title as the first thread when visiting the “all forum” level, and they get sucked into the Traditional Forum, wondering what on earth somebody could possibly mean by posting something so inflammatory.
b) It rankles them to read their Sister-Bertha-Better-Than-You’s congratulate themselves on what is actually a gift God has given them on the form of the Mass in which they find the greatest consolation and grace, or that they prefer the rosary over lectio divina, or that they would have been happier before 1969, because the Church was at the height of her perfection right then, and who put others down because they find grace in the much-maligned Novus Ordo…and you know as well as I do, that there is a big fat streak of “Oh, well, the NO, strictly speaking it is valid, sure, BUT…”
There are many on this forum with a “why settle for the merely valid, when you could have the TLM?” attitude. There are a lot of Catholics who think of the NO as a great deal more than “merely valid”, and it turns out that there isn’t a “Novus Ordo and All Things After 1969” forum, is there?
c) They think that maybe if they read what someone who thinks differently than they do, they just might learn something. And sometimes, they do. So even if there were an “All-Novus” forum, I’d hope that some non-traditional Catholics would still come here and feel free to voice their questions and objections to what’s posted. That’s what forums are for. Do you want to have a chance to enlighten someone who doesn’t understand you, or would you rather just talk among yourselves?
Well, those are a few possibilities…
Tell me, honestly…if there were a “Novus Ordo and All Things After 1969” Forum, would you never be tempted to read it?
C
Cat
Guest
I come here to defend Holy Mother Church and the Holy Father against those who accuse her and him of heresy.
I am a convert from evangelical Protestantism. Until I joined CAF, I had no idea that there was an unfriendly division between Catholics.
I see danger in this division. I’ve been there.
I am a convert from evangelical Protestantism. Until I joined CAF, I had no idea that there was an unfriendly division between Catholics.
I see danger in this division. I’ve been there.
G
gavanhe
Guest
This “division” is in reality no different to the unsuccessful attempts by various groups through the past two millennium to impose their ideologies onto our church. The Holy Spirit is continuing to guard his church and be with us, our task is to continue to pray and give practical guidance in truth to those around us ie. CAF.
If we only had like minded people conversing on CAF then we’d be derelict in our duties to evangelise. Therefore I would welcome diverse opinions on various aspects of catholicism, and debate the truth with them and hopefully infect them with it.
Gerry
- Status