People who do not like traditional Catholicism

[DustinsDad]

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?

You hit the nail on the head. The motu proprio of last year has set them in a panic. The fact that there is a “traditional catholic” sub-forum here put them in a tizzy. They were here from the beginning, but starting about January I guess, this sub-forum really became overrun with trolls and baiters.

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?

There’s more to the question than simple liturgical “preference”…there are underlying theolgical issues involved. The Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite, traditional folks feel, more clearly communicates many Catholic Truths. Obviously, given the reaction of the “anti-traditional” folks, they agree with this thesis. They are afraid of certain Catholic Truths being communicated more clearly…Truths these folks thought were dead and buried - or at least brushed off into an insignificant corner. The motu proprio changed this.

Therefore, the recent lifting of “restrictions” of the EF becomes a lightening rod for contention. They are here to do their best to make sure EF doesn’t catch on, and to make sure that the Catholic Truths they thought were dead and buried don’t resurface in any large number.

Hence, you’ll see hot debates incited here by non-traditionalists that center not only on the liturgy, but around things such as the nature of Salvation, the nature of the Church itself, and the mutability of dogma, etc.

It’s all related.

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?

It’s not.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[Cat]

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

OTOH, in the past, these differing ideologies often did not touch the person in the pew, who lived and died in their Catholicism unaware that forces were trying to destroy their church.

In today’s age, the internet makes it possible for everyone from toddlers to nursing home residents to learn everything.

Like I said, in my corner of the world, I have not run into any conflict in Catholicism. We have daily TLM in our city and have had it for several decades, along with wonderful NO Masses. Our bishops have a great record of conservative, orthodox Catholicism.

I know that many Catholics in our city hate our bishop and call him names because they want “women priests” or “reproductive choice.” This is nothing new to me–these so called “liberal Christians” are also present in Protestantism.

But it was on the internet, on this forum, that I learned about the traditionalists who believe that the NO is a heretical travesty and that Pope John Paul II was a liberal who led the Church further away from the Church than all of his predecessors.

I had learned in RCIA about “abuses” in the Mass and we had been given a list of things to watch out for and stay away from (e.g., liturgical dance, we were told, is not allowed in the U.S. in Catholic Churches).

But it was on the internet, on this forum, that I have met people who keep track of abuses and seem to NEVER find a Mass that is abuse-free. These people are never happy with the Mass they attend. Indeed, the only abuse-free Mass that they have ever attended exists only in their imagination. Although they correctly discern that the Holy Mass is of heaven, they forget that it is also of earth and therefore will contain human failings and mistakes and that not all of these are deliberate attempts or Satanic plots to undermine the Church and the Gospel…

I am grateful that I had an excellent RCIA class, that I have done a lot of reading, and that my bishop and priests provide us with fantastic adult formation opportunities.

**But IMO, those who do not have these advantages can be led astray and made weak in their faith by the knowledge of the conflicts between Catholic and Catholic. ** Without the internet, many of these people would have been innocent of the knowledge of these conflicts. But the internet throws it in their face, and often, like a bad auto accident, we can’t help but stop and gaze at the horror.

One more awful possibility that has occurred to me is that some of the more extreme traditionalist may not really be friendly to the Church at all, but are actually enemies of Catholicism who are attempting to drive a wedge between Catholics. This is the “Tokyo Rose” approach–sow seeds of dissent and create a disturbance that can cause factions, bitterness, and clamor. I hope this is not true, but at times, I do wonder about the motives of some of the more vicious traditionalists who seem to see evil in every thing that the modern Catholic Church does.

I have suggested before that the Moderators of this Board should somehow try to limit access to some of these topics that new converts and “innocent” Catholics could find disturbing. I personally think that people should not be allowed access into the Traditional Forum until they have been a member of CAF for at least a solid year and have a record of charitable posts.

Another possibility is to require that people complete a “Basic Education” in the Catholic Church course (perhaps reading various CA pamphlets, etc, and completing an online quiz aboutwhat they have read) before they are allowed to access the Traditional Forum. This would at least insure that people have the basic knowledge to recognize a schismatic idea when they see it, and have the tools to respond adequately to accusations of “heresy.”

I think it is dangerous to allow the wavering person or the new convert into these internet discussions that make it seem like the Catholic Church is at the brink of disaster. This is not the Middle Ages when information took years to reach the common people. This is 2008, when we have all the knowledge (and lies) of the ages at our fingertips and on our screens.

 

[WILKM]

Interesting topic.

I only became involved in forums four years ago because of Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ”. It was only then I discovered that there seemed to be this division amongst Catholics, i.e. Traditional Catholics and N.O. Catholics. I had never ever come across this division until coming to the various forums and, to be honest, I have never come across it in my day to day life and I have lived in Zimbabwe, South Africa and now in Ireland. I vaguely remember Latin Masses as a child. I’m 45 now.

The internet forums have advantages and disadvantages and the disadvantages I have come across are that people can speak their minds and say what they like more so than face to face. Many Traditional Catholics on the various Catholic forums (not just here) come across as being extremely judgemental and hypocritical, extremely critical on outward appearances (what one wears, head coverings, whether to stand, sit or kneel), whether a Mass is valid and many on other forums have gone as far as saying that if you go to a NO Mass, it’s not valid at all, etc. etc. etc. and the criticism goes on and on and on and on. Traditional Catholics appear to be desperately miserable and unhappy people.

I can understand there being problems between non-Catholics and Catholics but when there is this perceived division within the Catholic Church between Traditionals and No Catholics, it is mind boggling. We’re supposed to be on the same side of the fence aren’t we? None of us are perfect but we strive to be. Didn’t Jesus say that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church?

My thoughts anyway.

 

[gavanhe]

OTOH, in the past, these differing ideologies often did not touch the person in the pew, who lived and died in their Catholicism unaware that forces were trying to destroy their church.
snip…snip…snip…

But then again a lot of people were led astray by these various ideologies such as Lollards, Waldenses, Jansenist etc. etc.
Gerry

 

[EasterJoy]

There’s more to the question than simple liturgical “preference”…there are underlying theolgical issues involved. The Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite, traditional folks feel, more clearly communicates many Catholic Truths. Obviously, given the reaction of the “anti-traditional” folks, they agree with this thesis. They are afraid of certain Catholic Truths being communicated more clearly…Truths these folks thought were dead and buried - or at least brushed off into an insignificant corner. The motu proprio changed this.

Therefore, the recent lifting of “restrictions” of the EF becomes a lightening rod for contention. They are here to do their best to make sure EF doesn’t catch on, and to make sure that the Catholic Truths they thought were dead and buried don’t resurface in any large number.

Hence, you’ll see hot debates incited here by non-traditionalists that center not only on the liturgy, but around things such as the nature of Salvation, the nature of the Church itself, and the mutability of dogma, etc.

There you have it. The “sure, the NO is valid, BUT…” attitude. The attitude that the EF is the* superior* liturgy, period.

There are little rifts between what the Church really teaches and what slant a few of those who consider themselves “traditional” put on those teachings. The “…well, yes, that is what the catechism says, BUT…” attitudes. The “I don’t think the Popes have really read the documents of the old councils, or else they just choose not to believe them because…” attitudes.

This forum literally has posters who feel themselves more Catholic than the Pope…in fact, let’s face it, more Catholic than the last five Popes put together. They are brilliant theologians, in their own minds, and more than a little frustrated that there aren’t more in the actual Spirit-chosen heirarchy who see things their way.

That’s not supposed to concern any of the rest of the Church? Please.

 

[Cat]

You hit the nail on the head. The motu proprio of last year has set them in a panic. The fact that there is a “traditional catholic” sub-forum here put them in a tizzy. They were here from the beginning, but starting about January I guess, this sub-forum really became overrun with trolls and baiters.

There’s more to the question than simple liturgical “preference”…there are underlying theolgical issues involved. The Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite, traditional folks feel, more clearly communicates many Catholic Truths. Obviously, given the reaction of the “anti-traditional” folks, they agree with this thesis. They are afraid of certain Catholic Truths being communicated more clearly…Truths these folks thought were dead and buried - or at least brushed off into an insignificant corner. The motu proprio changed this.

**Therefore, the recent lifting of “restrictions” of the EF becomes a lightening rod for contention. They are here to do their best to make sure EF doesn’t catch on, and to make sure that the Catholic Truths they thought were dead and buried don’t resurface in any large number. **
Hence, you’ll see hot debates incited here by non-traditionalists that center not only on the liturgy, but around things such as the nature of Salvation, the nature of the Church itself, and the mutability of dogma, etc.

It’s all related.

It’s not.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

(boldface mine)

In reference to the boldfaced portion above: this is an incredible accusation. Absolutely incredible. Unbelievable.

The Holy Father says the NO Mass. The Vatican approves NO Mass. Are they also part of this “group of people” who are trying to make sure that the EF doesn’t catch on and are trying to keep certain Catholic truths dead and buried?

 

[Michael_Neal]

I generally think most Catholics I know can appreciate both traditional and legitimate contemporary aspects of the church without become uncharitable towards others.

I consider myself traditional in that I do my best to uphold all of the teachings and practices of the Church, I pray the rosary, wear a scapular, and I enjoy traditional music.

At the same time I don’t have a problem with the NO Mass. I attend both the Tridentine and NO Mass and can appreciate them both. I have no problem singing along with contemporary music or enjoying it even though I like traditional music better.

I also believe in being charitable to those in the Church who are confused and misled rather than screaming at them, wagging my finger at them etc. This is where some Traditionalists end up being just as far from Christ as the people they accuse.

You can observe all the teachings of the church but if you forget about Love it all falls apart and is meaningless.

 

[Freshman88]

Are they also part of this “group of people” who are trying to make sure that the EF doesn’t catch on and are trying to keep certain Catholic truths dead and buried?

That is the shocking truth.

Some are more open then others, while others stand up for Holy Mother Church.

Just as you are witnessing a battle amongst laymen, so it is also in the hierarchy.

 

[rwoehmke]

There’s more to the question than simple liturgical “preference”…there are underlying theological issues involved. The Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite, traditional folks feel, more clearly communicates many Catholic Truths. Obviously, given the reaction of the “anti-traditional” folks, they agree with this thesis. They are afraid of certain Catholic Truths being communicated more clearly…Truths these folks thought were dead and buried - or at least brushed off into an insignificant corner. The motu proprio changed this.

Therefore, the recent lifting of “restrictions” of the EF becomes a lightening rod for contention. They are here to do their best to make sure EF doesn’t catch on, and to make sure that the Catholic Truths they thought were dead and buried don’t resurface in any large number. Peace in Christ, DustinsDad

OK, now you have stimulated my curiosity. Could you list a few of these truths hidden or obscured by the N.O.? I am struggling with seeing even unclearly how this happens. I personally cannot think of a single truth that I want to remain obscure. I should think that there being a dearth of folks out there with little if any knowledge of Latin it would be the TLM that might obscure ones knowledge of what transpires at Mass, or for that matter outside of Mass. Help me to understand. Thanks .

 

[Michael_Neal]

let me add that I agree there are many problems with the church, liturgy, and people’s tendency to pick and choose what to believe within the teachings. I just think we need to communicate better because we will win no converts by being bitter and argumentative, and we are also putting our souls just as much in jeopardy by acting like this.

 

[EasterJoy]

That is the shocking truth.

Some are more open then others, while others stand up for Holy Mother Church.

Just as you are witnessing a battle amongst laymen, so it is also in the hierarchy.

“That is the shocking truth”?!?

So you are saying that the Pope and the Vatican is part of this so-called “group of people” standing in the way of the EF and the truth? Yet it is the Pope who brings the EF to the fore? I must be missing your meaning, because that doesn’t even make sense.

Those battles are happening from top to bottom, you are right about that. Very often, the ways they are being waged are not to our credit. Too often, the way they are waged is scandalous.

How can one “stand up for Holy Mother Church” and yet promote strife? It cannot be done. Are we witnessing that we are the Body of Christ in how we discuss these issues? Or are we witnessing that we’re a big institution full of petty people looking for certainty and security, in which human power struggles and personal agendas are allowed to obscure our whole reason for being?

How “I belong to Vatican II” and “I belong to Vatican I” or “I belong to the TLM” and “I belong to the NO” differs from “I belong to Paul” and “I belong to Apollos”, I do not know. Surely the Pope teaches that there is and need be no division between the two, not any whatsoever! We know what Paul had to say about that:

“I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose.” (1 Cor. 1:10)

We have Rome to teach us how to agree in what we say. The Holy Spirit is given to us that we may be united in Christ Jesus. What excuse do we have to do otherwise?

 

[palmas85]

There you have it. The “sure, the NO is valid, BUT…” attitude. The attitude that the EF is the superior** liturgy, period.

There are little rifts between what the Church really teaches and what slant a few of those who consider themselves “traditional” put on those teachings. The “…well, yes, that is what the catechism says, BUT…” attitudes. The “I don’t think the Popes have really read the documents of the old councils, or else they just choose not to believe them because…” attitudes.

This forum literally has posters who feel themselves more Catholic than the Pope…in fact, let’s face it, more Catholic than the last five Popes put together. They are brilliant theologians, in their own minds, and more than a little frustrated that there aren’t more in the actual Spirit-chosen heirarchy who see things their way.

That’s not supposed to concern any of the rest of the Church? Please.

On the flip side you also have the group that says
"Why yes the EF(Traditional Mass) is valid and fine
BUT
attitude.

Whats the difference?

Feeling more Catholic than the Pope or the last five popes put together and being brilliant theologians in their own minds reserved only to traditionalists?:tsktsk: I’ll bet my next retirement check there are more than a few on the progressive side of the aisle that feel exactly the same way.

Some who post here quite often as a matter of fact.

 

[Catherine_S]

Interesting topic.

I only became involved in forums four years ago because of Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ”. It was only then I discovered that there seemed to be this division amongst Catholics, i.e. Traditional Catholics and N.O. Catholics. I had never ever come across this division until coming to the various forums and, to be honest, I have never come across it in my day to day life and I have lived in Zimbabwe, South Africa and now in Ireland. I vaguely remember Latin Masses as a child. I’m 45 now.

The internet forums have advantages and disadvantages and the disadvantages I have come across are that people can speak their minds and say what they like more so than face to face. Many Traditional Catholics on the various Catholic forums (not just here) come across as being extremely judgemental and hypocritical, extremely critical on outward appearances (what one wears, head coverings, whether to stand, sit or kneel), whether a Mass is valid and many on other forums have gone as far as saying that if you go to a NO Mass, it’s not valid at all, etc. etc. etc. and the criticism goes on and on and on and on. Traditional Catholics appear to be desperately miserable and unhappy people.

I can understand there being problems between non-Catholics and Catholics but when there is this perceived division within the Catholic Church between Traditionals and No Catholics, it is mind boggling. We’re supposed to be on the same side of the fence aren’t we? None of us are perfect but we strive to be. Didn’t Jesus say that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church?

My thoughts anyway.

For most of the world’s Catholics there is no division!
I believe that what we are seeing in the west is due to both camps. *
Both have their own*** interest and agenda at heart rather than** the best interest *of Christ’s Church.
This stems from insecurity and arrogance.
Due to pride.
Which always produces self righteousness at the expence of charity.
Jesus Christ will use both to bring about His will for the Church. No matter how uncomfortable this might become for both sides.We must keep our eyes on Him and all will be well. He will always protect and guide His Church.
I was raised and grew up going to Mass and now I attend Liturgy. Both have warts and a purification is taking place in our time. *
We are in this world but do not belong to this world. There is a balance to be found.
*We need to allow the Holy Spirit room to bring about new growth and deeper understanding to the Church in terms of Community and Mission. *
Community is not closing in on one’s self nor is Mission becoming like the world.
It will be so!
God has provided us a wonderful Pope at this point in Church history who can and will guide us forward…Pope Benedict!
My two :twocents: cents worth.
*. *

 

[Cat]

That is the shocking truth.

Some are more open then others, while others stand up for Holy Mother Church.

Just as you are witnessing a battle amongst laymen, so it is also in the hierarchy.

Freshman88, please forgive me for not being more clear. Your reply to my questions is quite frightening, and I fear that I may have confused you with my original post.

Please allow me to be crystal clear, and I hope you will answer these questions:

True or False: The current pope is trying to keep EF from catching on.

True or False: The current pope is trying to keep certain Catholic truths dead and buried.

True or False: The Vatican is trying to keep the EF from catching on.

True or False: The Vatican is trying to keep certain Catholic truths dead and buried.

Thank you.

 

[Catherine_S]

For most of the world’s Catholics there is no division!
I believe that what we are seeing in the west is due to both camps. *
Both have their own*** interest and agenda at heart rather than** the best interest *of Christ’s Church.
This stems from insecurity and arrogance.
Due to pride.
Which always produces self righteousness at the expence of charity.
Jesus Christ will use both to bring about His will for the Church. No matter how uncomfortable this might become for both sides.We must keep our eyes on Him and all will be well. He will always protect and guide His Church.
I was raised and grew up going to Mass and now I attend Liturgy. Both have warts and a purification is taking place in our time. *
We are in this world but do not belong to this world. There is a balance to be found.
*We need to allow the Holy Spirit room to bring about new growth and deeper understanding to the Church in terms of Community and Mission. *
Community is not closing in on one’s self nor is Mission becoming like the world.
It will be so!
God has provided us a wonderful Pope at this point in Church history who can and will guide us forward…Pope Benedict! Both sides having there little sissy fits over music etc. after he visited the USA did not seem to bother him much…God Bless him :byzsoc: !
My two :twocents: cents worth.
.

 

[GemmaRose]

Personally, I have no problem with this attitude and agree with it. However, many traditionalists I’ve come across believe that the EF is superior and try to force this “truth” upon you. I find this extremely annoying.

Why? There are several reasons. First, the arguments they use are usually not very logical, which I find annoying in of itself. Second, when they try to foist what is essentially their opinion on you it comes across as extremely prideful and elitist (although I think many don’t realize this). They act as if they hold the true faith, when really all they have is a personal subjective opinion.

I’ve also come across a strange psychological mindset in many traditionalists. They seem to place an inordinate amount of attention on external practices. Progess in general is sometimes viewed as bad. Prudent judgement in other matters sometimes seems to be lacking. 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 percieved as not being visibilly “holy” enough. I’ve actually been in situations where individuals have been vocally singled out in front of a large group for not being “pious” enough.

Granted, these psycological observations do not influence their objective argument (if there is one). However, they do increase the annoyance factor.

I’ve read through each post on this thread (and re-read a few), but this one seems to best describe how I feel.

Sometimes, I don’t know how to describe myself. I’ve always thought of myself as a liberal because I prefer the NO, yet, especially after reading this thread, I am probably more traditional than anything else. I’m cradle-Catholic and Catholic school raised. I miss long Confession lines, devotions, processions, etc. I don’t have a problem with Church teaching. If I could change anything in the Church at all, there would only be 2 things: Allowing women to become deacons, and allowing Confession over the phone (simply because we have so few priests and Confession times, it would be so much easier and less of a wait to go to Confession). (Please don’t start trying to “teach” me why these things can’t be. I understand the reasonings, I just personally wish these two things could change.)

However, as long as the NO remains a valid Mass, I don’t think I would attend TLM even if you paid me. This is not said as a criticism of TLM, its years of tradition, or of anyone who prefers it. My preference comes from my own personal experience, which if I were to explain here, would probably run into two or three consecutive posts, so I will spare you. I will just say that because of my experience, I truly don’t understand how TLM leads people to worship (but I guess that’s really another whole thread.)

As Sarpedon wrote, it is the superior attitude of some posters on some threads, intentional or not, that can be very annoying. I also tend to worry about the attention to external practices. One very good example is in this very forum where someone asked:

If one were to do multiple prayers, say, just 5 Our Fathers or 5 Our Fathers and 3 Hail Marys for penance or other, does one need to say “Amen” after each one or should the person finish all the prayers and then say the one “amen” after?

And does saying the “amen” after each one or not invalidate the prayer?

Now, I’m not saying it’s wrong to ask a sincere question, nor is it wrong to want to “follow the rules,” and I’m not judging the person who posted, but what kind of God does this person believe he or she is praying to?? One who would discount one’s prayer or penance because of a word not being said? Or a loving Father overjoyed that His son or daughter has come to repentance?

That’s the kind of thing I worry about with some “traditionalists,” that some may be more closely following the Pharisees than following Jesus.

My only desire is that Jesus be loved, glorified and praised by each and every human being. We, as Catholics, should be best at it since we are members of the Church which holds the fullness of faith. Do we really glorify and praise Him when we worry over petty details? After all, isn’t it He Himself who always reassured with a greeting of peace? Do we really love Him if we are afraid of Him?

Yes, He is our Judge… but He is also our Lover who died for us, the fountain of Mercy, the One who calls us and draws us closer to Himself each day. Trembling in fear impedes our spiritual progress and is not the type of relationship He desires with us.

 

[Dauphin]

The attitude that the EF is the* superior* liturgy, period.

Well… it is. It’s the most Catholic thing on earth. That’s why people don’t like it.

 

[Cat]

I’ve read through each post on this thread (and re-read a few), but this one seems to best describe how I feel.

Sometimes, I don’t know how to describe myself. I’ve always thought of myself as a liberal because I prefer the NO, yet, especially after reading this thread, I am probably more traditional than anything else. I’m cradle-Catholic and Catholic school raised. I miss long Confession lines, devotions, processions, etc. I don’t have a problem with Church teaching. If I could change anything in the Church at all, there would only be 2 things: Allowing women to become deacons, and allowing Confession over the phone (simply because we have so few priests and Confession times, it would be so much easier and less of a wait to go to Confession). (Please don’t start trying to “teach” me why these things can’t be. I understand the reasonings, I just personally wish these two things could change.)

However, as long as the NO remains a valid Mass, I don’t think I would attend TLM even if you paid me. This is not said as a criticism of TLM, its years of tradition, or of anyone who prefers it. My preference comes from my own personal experience, which if I were to explain here, would probably run into two or three consecutive posts, so I will spare you. I will just say that because of my experience, I truly don’t understand how TLM leads people to worship (but I guess that’s really another whole thread.)

As Sarpedon wrote, it is the superior attitude of some posters on some threads, intentional or not, that can be very annoying. I also tend to worry about the attention to external practices. One very good example is in this very forum where someone asked:

Now, I’m not saying it’s wrong to ask a sincere question, nor is it wrong to want to “follow the rules,” and I’m not judging the person who posted, but what kind of God does this person believe he or she is praying to?? One who would discount one’s prayer or penance because of a word not being said? Or a loving Father overjoyed that His son or daughter has come to repentance?

That’s the kind of thing I worry about with some “traditionalists,” that some may be more closely following the Pharisees than following Jesus.

My only desire is that Jesus be loved, glorified and praised by each and every human being. We, as Catholics, should be best at it since we are members of the Church which holds the fullness of faith. Do we really glorify and praise Him when we worry over petty details? After all, isn’t it He Himself who always reassured with a greeting of peace? Do we really love Him if we are afraid of Him?

Yes, He is our Judge… but He is also our Lover who died for us, the fountain of Mercy, the One who calls us and draws us closer to Himself each day. Trembling in fear impedes our spiritual progress and is not the type of relationship He desires with us.

Thank you so much for this lovely post.

 

[Dauphin]

Yeah… if you want good liturgy, you’re just a pharisee.

 

[anamchara]

Many Traditional Catholics on the various Catholic forums (not just here) come across as being extremely judgemental and hypocritical, extremely critical on outward appearances (what one wears, head coverings, whether to stand, sit or kneel), whether a Mass is valid and many on other forums have gone as far as saying that if you go to a NO Mass, it’s not valid at all, etc. etc. etc.