The Generational Divide

  • Thread starter Thread starter gcshapero
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OraLabora said:
Who is it that once said “if you are not liberal when you are young, you have no heart, and if you are not conservative when you are old, you have no brain”?
Click to expand...
I believe it was Winston Churchill, but I could be wrong.

EDITED: I looked this up and apparently it was John Adams who said it, but Thomas Jefferson preserved it for posterity in a journal in 1799 giving credit to Adams.
 
Last edited:
That’s a silly fake apocryphal quote invented by the internet. There’s no proof Winston Churchill ever said it. Also I see it used on Twitter by Americans all the time…“liberal” and “conservative” do not mean the same thing TODAY in the UK as in the US, never mind comparing c. 1940 UK vs. 2018 USA.

Modern American “conservatism” is really neoliberalism.

“Liberal” and “Conservative” are very context-specific terms. In c. 1990 Soviet Union, old hardcore Communists were the “conservatives” looking to preserve traditional Soviet societal order against the radical anti-Communist capitalist liberals who ultimately brought down the USSR.
 
Last edited:
Novel, Schmovel.
I don’t accept any generation name coming from a Boomer.

The struggle is real :muscle:t2:
 
I actually came across that quote before the internet, but it’s one of those sayings that gets attributed to everybody …
 
LaetificetJuventutem said:
That’s a silly fake apocryphal quote invented by the internet. There’s no proof Winston Churchill ever said it.
Click to expand...
I edited my earlier response attributing it to Churchill after a little research…

From John Adams Said it First - Freakonomics Freakonomics

One of the pleasures of compiling the Yale Book of Quotations was tracing and cross-referencing different versions and precursors of famous quotes. This one is usually credited to Georges Clemenceau, but W. Gurney Benham‘s Book of Quotations cites French premier and historian Francois Guizot (1787-1874), translating his statement as “Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart; to be one at 30 is proof of want of head.” Benham asserts that “Clemenceau adopted this saying, substituting ‘socialiste’ for ‘republicain. ‘”

But I was delighted to find that John Adams had expressed a similar idea well before Guizot entered adulthood. Thomas Jefferson preserved this quip, writing in a 1799 journal that Adams had said: “A boy of 15 who is not a democrat is good for nothing, and he is no better who is a democrat at 20.”
 
LaetificetJuventutem said:
Wishful thinking from Baby Boomers. At this point the middle-aged & senior-aged populations are Vatican II cradle babies. The reforms of V2 are tightly intertwined with their generational identity. Admitting their generation’s “reforms” failed catastrophically is not something most Boomers are willing to do. It strikes at the heart of their sense of self/identity.
Click to expand...
I’m a baby boomer, and had no say in the reforms. Born in 1956, I was too young for anyone to listen to. The parties who are responsible for the reforms are the Greatest Generation- men of John Paul II’s generation.
 
Wow. Lots of hate and contempt in there. And I say that as a Gen-Xer.
 
Sarcelle said:
I think the majority of Catholics even in previous generations can be considered lukewarm Catholics, except now, no one bothers about putting up appearances, unlike in the past.
Click to expand...
That’s what I am thinking.

Now there are “better things to do”. We have 24/7 online shopping, multiple televised sports, Netflix, malls, and so many other things available to us that if we are lukewarm, why would we choose church?

We don’t need to keep up any appearances anymore. 😐
 
I agree as another Gen Xer

The accusations leveled against the Boomers in this thread is kind of pointless really as most Boomers were in no position of power to implement Vatican II.
 
Last edited:
LaetificetJuventutem said:
The reforms of V2 are tightly intertwined with their generational identity.
Click to expand...
You’re kidding right? I’m a baby boomer and I was 5 years old when Vatican II closed. I came into adulthood in the early '80s when I graduated from university and got my first full-time job, well after the changes were implemented and the new missal and breviary were in place. I wasn’t even interested in Church affairs, like many young men of the era.

Yours post is full of unwarranted venom directed at the wrong people. Maybe some of the priests post-council got carried away by the changes, but the would have been a full generation older, at least, than the baby boomers. And if they were baby boomers, they would have just been coming out of seminary at that point.
 
I think the concept of the “youthquake” is significant here. Although the baby-boomers maybe weren’t totally in charge yet, I think the world was trembling at the thought of all those young people, and maybe trying in advance to attract / keep them.
As wikipedia says: “The concept of the “bubble-up” theory, where ideas and inspiration was taken from the low-context culture instead of the high-context culture setting the standards, was the lasting impact of the youthquake movement.”
Sounds like Catholic liturgy since 1965 to me! 🤣
 
It would have been nice to learn Latin in high school. it would make the mass better to understand when Latin is used! They use Latin on EWTN.
 
Sorry, bud, but them’s the breaks.

One of the main roles of a Bishop is to wisely manage the diocesan budget. In the real world, money talks, and BS walks.

If you have a viable parish plan, then by all means go to the Bishop with it. If it makes sense in dollars and cents, you’re in. If it doesn’t, well, sayonara, see you tomorra!
 
Last edited:
While I wouldn’t exactly say the Extraordinary Form is being “tacitly suppressed” anywhere, I do think it’s one dimensional to think that a whole parish needs to be financed around the EF. If those that have an affinity for the EF are a “niche demographic”, then I guess that makes the various Eastern Catholic Churches in most areas of no importance at all.

Like I mentioned: at my former parish we had Mass said in three languages each Sunday, consisting of both forms of the Latin Rite. One EF Mass will suffice. An EF Mass sandwiched in between an English OF Mass and a Spanish OF Mass really isn’t that logistically difficult. Finding a priest to do it may be another story.
 
Last edited:
At the parochial level, you have the same thing. The pastor is responsible for wisely managing the resources, human and material, of the parish. If an added EF mass is going to be attended by 40 people, and an added OF mass by 200, then you know who will win out.

And, as you say, there is the problem of finding a priest who can be spared.

Whether you do it at the diocesan level or the parochial level, it all comes down to optimum management of limited resources, especially on a long-term scale. Real life is not Field of Dreams: “Build it, and they will come”. First you have to prove that they will come, in sufficient numbers, over the long term. It’s sounds like a catch-22, but it is not.
 
True enough, the pastor is responsible for managing resources. But crowd funding is something that works not only in the secular world but in the life of the Church as well. If there is no 1962 Missal at the parish where a group of people desire the EF, then they should raise money to buy the missal and whatever else may be needed for the celebration of the Mass. They are not especially pricey.

I agree a stable group of a parish’s faithful do need to prove people will come to an EF Mass, but keep in mind two things.
  1. A priest could decide to do this all on his own. That’s what happened at my parish. The priest knows the EF, and wants to do it in his archdiocesan parish on a regular basis. I never would’ve discovered the EF had my pastor not celebrated it every Sunday at 9:30 AM. People came. They still go. This is one parish that I’ve experienced, but such cases are not isolated. In this case, a real life case, the “if you build it, they will come approach” did work. Kevin Costner would be proud. I never had any interest in the EF beforehand, but because it was there, I kept coming to it, and grew to love it very quickly.
  2. A stable group in the parish does need to have their request listened to, in accord with Summorum Pontificum art. 5 § 1:
In parishes where a group of the faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition stably exists, the parish priest should willingly accede to their requests to celebrate Holy Mass according to the rite of the 1962 Roman Missal. He should ensure that the good of these members of the faithful is harmonized with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish…

If a group of the lay faithful, as mentioned in Art. 5, §1, has not been granted its requests by the parish priest, it should inform the diocesan bishop. The bishop is earnestly requested to satisfy their desire. If he does not wish to provide for such celebration, the matter should be referred to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei."
Click to expand...
But then the question is, what constitutes a “stable group”? Five people? 10? 20? I would certainly think 40 people all asking for the same pastoral care would constitute a sizable group, even if that group attends the EF Mass at 6:30 AM on Sundays. Numbers aren’t mentioned in the motu proprio.

Again, I think I think if a priest were to set time aside for an EF Mass, like my pastor did, people will come. There needs to be catechesis, of course, but people will come because the Mass is the Mass. We just need priests to be bold, as well as lay people if they really want the EF in their area. Sitting on one’s hands certainly won’t help matters.
 
Good points.
In my own experience, assisting at the TLM Mass takes more effort and engagement. Those Catholics who never make it back to the pew after receiving the Eucharist in the OF Mass might not even give the TLM a real try.
Of course if they do, they might learn about the top secret “Prayers After Mass,” lol!
 
Last edited:
anon10271182 said:
Those Catholics who never make it back to the pew after receiving the Eucharist in the OF Mass might not even give the TLM a real try.
Click to expand...
I think its most Catholics that aren’t that interested in the Latin Mass, not just a relatively few.

Its really fine if people want to go, but I don’t see if as an emerging majority or even real “competition” for the mainstream masses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top