Strange Reactions

[blackrobe]

Take this as an example, I’ve just visited the bookshop at my local Cathedral in the hopes that I could buy a 1962 Missal. When I asked the shop attendant if they had one, she looked at me as if I had just asked her if they sell hot dogs. She also said she hoped that the TLM wouldn’t come back.

When someone says something about the TLM “coming back” I usually ask him what gave him the idea it ever went away. When I mention to people that I am a member of St. Joseph Parish but often attend the local indult oratory for the TLM I get that look that says the person is thinking “I hope he’s taking his medication.”

JSA+

 

[Pug]

Brennan, thanks for your thoughts. I’ve listened to Bishop Sheen before. He’s good.

As far as the ethos of the current Church, for the past 40 years or see it seems as if it has been, “Don’t offend anyone, get along with everyone.”

Yikes, that sounds like American culture. Do you feel this is relevant? I’ve always considered the Church to be a world sort of thing (as do you, I’m sure). In the world, is this the current Church ethos that you sense? Or only in the West?

Do Latin-rite Catholics in eastern countries have this? I ask about the Latin rite because the liturgy thing under discussion here applies to them. Maybe there nobody finds it strange to consider the liturgy in Latin.

 

[Petergee]

I am not a traditionalist, but I feel that it can be very hard to participate in certain areas at the parish. You mentioned catechists so I’ll mention this. I am on the RCIA team, and part of what we technically have to do is stand there in front of the parish and say that the candidates (catechumens) are pursuing a Christian life. Sometimes you have the unfortunate knowledge that every single one is currently cohabiting. So, you can not show up for the scrutinies, or you can decide that the RCIA team is not for you, or you can accept this reality.

OR you can tell the truth! Didn’t you think of that alternative? Who told you that you “have to” tell a blatant lie in church? Whoever told you that has got no idea what the Church teaches. If, God forbid, it was the parish priest who insists that you lie about someething so important, then report him to the bishop. This is nothing to do with “traditionalism”.

In my experience, things that make you have to make choices pop up all over the place. I don’t know the answer to this type of problem, not off-hand. But some of the hardest part of volunteering is seeing things or being required to do things that are emotionally difficult.

Emotions aside, what you claim you “have to” do is a sin. The answer is to refuse to sin, and do the RCIA team member’s job properly. And yes I am on my parish RCIA team.

 

[Cobbfmly]

…Why is do they dislike the TLM so much? And why are they so against it making a big come back?..

I have not spoken with many people that remember TLM, so I do not know why they are against it coming back.

Personally, as a post-Vatican II baby, I have no problem with TLM coming back. For me, TLM has always been around as I grew up in an area that TLM never stopped being offered (some California Missions never stopped offering TLM).

As an adult I learned that the NO masses and TLM are just two of many ways Catholics celebrate mass. In all cases, the Eucharist is central to all masses. Knowing this, I see no reason for there to be tension between those people who attend NO masses and those that attend TLM. Mass is all about the EUCHARIST regardless of how it is celebrated.

Personally I prefer mass in my native language. I am likely dyslexic and trying to read the English translation during mass would require enough of my concentration that it would take away from my ability to focus on the mass itself. I love to savor every word of the mass, esp the Eucharistic prayers, and mass being in English allows me to do this.

I love the traditional elements of Catholic churches (“teaching” stained glass, kneelers, visible tabernacle, etc) and notice when they are missing (almost walked out of a newer Catholic church because I was confused by the missing elements), However, I also recognize that none of this is necessary. Any mass, regardless of form, can be said anywhere as long as there is a priest available. Again, what makes the mass the mass is the EUCHARIST!

Ok, I have rambled. Basically, I say to all people, stop arguing about which mass is better and come to the EUCHARIST in whichever mass tradition you are comfortable with.

 

[Pug]

OR you can tell the truth! Didn’t you think of that alternative? Who told you that you “have to” tell a blatant lie in church? Whoever told you that has got no idea what the Church teaches. If, God forbid, it was the parish priest who insists that you lie about someething so important, then report him to the bishop. This is nothing to do with “traditionalism”.
Emotions aside, what you claim you “have to” do is a sin. The answer is to refuse to sin, and do the RCIA team member’s job properly. And yes I am on my parish RCIA team.

I was assuming that it was understood that the priest is aware of whatever information you believe you possess. To me, this was a given in the situation. Of course this has nothing to do with traditionalists per se, yet it has everything to do with why people have difficulty being volunteers in their parishes. I’m sure traditionalists run in to the same sort of weird situations that my friends and I do. Volunteering IS difficult.

Of course you don’t have to sin. Just quit RCIA (which includes you do not stand up there and lie) if you can’t resolve the issue to your satisfaction. I named this as an option. I was not endorsing any particular course of action. (I think it might depend partly on what exactly you think you know.) I was trying to illustrate how a person gets into the position of having to make various types of decisions, and that often one of the likely courses of action is to choose not to volunteer in that capacity. Thus, you get the result of fewer volunteers.

And yes, lest anyone ask, of course report the matter on up the line if that seems needed.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Brennan, thanks for your thoughts. I’ve listened to Bishop Sheen before. He’s good.

Yikes, that sounds like American culture. Do you feel this is relevant? I’ve always considered the Church to be a world sort of thing (as do you, I’m sure). In the world, is this the current Church ethos that you sense? Or only in the West?

Do Latin-rite Catholics in eastern countries have this? I ask about the Latin rite because the liturgy thing under discussion here applies to them. Maybe there nobody finds it strange to consider the liturgy in Latin.

I sense it has been all over the world for the past forty years but I only live in the U.S. so I am speaking primarily about the U.S.

 

[Scotty_PGH]

And so, by inference, I am an “abnormal” Catholic?!!

Scotty PGH, please stop to think before you hit the “send.”

Well, let’s see. If you have something that you can trace back for 2,000 years and 1,960 of those years it looked one way, while for 40 years it looked another way, which is the abnormal segment?

I’m assuming by your statement that you do not particularly care for the things Brennan listed: strong love and devotion for the TLM, altar rails, Communion on the tongue, churches that look Catholic, Gregorian chant.

This will apparently come as a complete surprise to you, but there are many of us who consider these things very much normal, and we don’t think of ourselves as abnormal. That is what Brennan was saying, and what I agreed with.

You will also read throughly enough to realize that Brennan’s post was in response to someone who labeled these things “radically traditional.” That’s pretty (and typically for that poster) inflammatory language. Perhaps you will admonish that poster to think before he hits Send? You are after all, an honest person, right?

 

[DustinsDad]

If a “traditionalist” simply prefers the John XXIII Mass whilst acknowledging the authority of his Pope, bishop and parish priest, that is no problem.

A “traditionalist” is normatively more than just a person merely preferring the ancient form of the Latin Mass. It is deeper than that. Part of that “deepness” is indeed respecting and acknowledging the authority ofthe pope, bishop and priest. I see respect this lived out at the Oratory in St. Louis more than ever before. It’s humbling.

When he refuses to comply with their ecumenism…

Could you give me an example of what it means to “comply with their ecumenism”?

If this means preaching the gospel in charity, which always involves the call to conversion to the One True Church - I’m all for it. If it means making people to feel “comfortable” while holding to heretical teachings, or ignoring those heretical teachings - I can not in faith go along with this “approach”. To to such would violate the spiritual work of mercy* to instruct the ignorant*.

Let’s say for example, that some of my students in a 6th grade PSR class have one or other parent who is a non-Catholic. How will I handle the situation in accord with the new “ecumanism”? Will I present the rock solid teachings and defined dogma of the Church, and instruct the students to pray fervently for the parents’ conversions for the salvation of their souls? Or will I give them some mish-mash about how we’re all on “different paths” to God so as to give them a false sense of security and peace?

Now not all priests/bishops in the norvus ordo sphere would disagree with my position - but many - perhaps most - would. And I suspect I’d be shown the door rather rapidly.

or their appointment of female altar servers,

See, I respect their authority to appoint female altar servers since the Church (unfortunately) allows for it - but this is a practical, prudential matter, As such, I respect their authority and their right to be wrong on this issue. I just couldn’t in good conscience participate in the practice. And this isn’t strictly a tradionalist issue - there are a few of those in the Norvus Ordo sphere that agree 100% with this.

At my old N.O. parish, under our former priest for example - he wouldn’t allow girl-altar-boys. Caused a huge boo-hoo among the more, eh, “liberal” parishnors…he held his ground God bless him!

In a case like this, I’d be happy to help them out training servers, and trying to bring a traditional dignity to the offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

or claims that what the Church teaches now is not what it has always taught, then yes that is a big problem,

The dogma and doctrine is still there - and always will be. How it’s presented isn’t always the same. Nowadays much of it is hidden or softened or watered down - this is a practical matter, a prudential judgement. As such, these new “approaches” are subject to critique. Also, many a non-dogmatic “novelty” has been introduced in the name of the “Spirit of Vatican II”. I dare say not all of them have bore fruit for the Church. Could be the understatement of the year.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[DustinsDad]

Not so, DD, it’s rather a recognition that there are traditionalists who decry anything post-conciliar, who want nothing to change whatsoever, who don’t want to even discuss modest change of any kind AND to recognize that there are liberals for whom the Church did not start until Vatican II.

There is a world of difference between liberals and tradionalists - between clinging unwaveringly to the dogmas and doctrines and traditions of the church and outright rejecting them.

…if you’re concerned that “traditionalists” are mistrusted, you should chat with those traditionalists.

Perhaps your mistrust of “traditionalists” is because you suspect they are doing what you yourself should be doing?

…The attitude they exhibit toward a great variety of things other than the Mass might go a long way to explaining why they are, as you say, mistrusted and also possibly why they are, themselves, the EF’s worst enemy.

Things “other than the mass”…like what?

DustinsDad

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.