Thoughts on traditionalism and the religious

[po18guy]

I can certainly agree that there are many things that are being misunderstood. That’s this whole question about “traditionalism” and religious. If you stop and think of it, there is no such thing as Catholic Tradition without religious. Many people misunderstand this and believe that you can have Catholicism without the presence of religious orders and religious congregations. Heck, people don’t even know that these are two forms of religious life. Most Catholic laymen and diocesan priests use the terms order and congregation interchangeably.

Catholic Tradition has been shaped by religious, taught by religious and studied by religious for centuries. Even today, most of the Pontifical Universities in the Catholic Church are handed over to religious to run, because prior to the 20th century, secular priests were rarely theologians and philosophers. Most theologians and philosophers were religious. Therefore, they ran the Church’s universities and schools of theology.

Many of the Protestant customs are carryovers from religious life, which have evolved over the centuries. They evolved in a way that is unfamiliar to the average lay Catholic, because the Catholic layman was never part of these forms of prayer.

For example, the typical Evangelical Protestant service with scripture and praise is an evolved form of Lectio Divina practiced by many religious communities even today. In the absence of a mass, the Evangelicals developed a communal form of Lectio Divina. In our Catholic faith, we sit quietly with the Scripture and engage in meditation and prayer. Whereas the Evangelical Christian does this with others. It acquired an interactive quality that was not present in the original practice.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

It is amazing how non-Catholic forms of worship have morphed since the 16th century. In an email circle I belong to, there is an Anglican Bishop, so we are learning about that tradition. Yet, they sought, some time after Henry VIII to morph the priesthood into a pastorship, thus their orders were lost. What price, unity?

I receive the Saint of the Day from American Catholic and therefore get a daily dose of Saintly influence. Many of their lives bring me to tears. Every Catholic should read the lives of the Saints. We have nothing to complain about whatsoever by comparison, and everything to admire.

 

[JReducation]

It is amazing how non-Catholic forms of worship have morphed since the 16th century. In an email circle I belong to, there is an Anglican Bishop, so we are learning about that tradition. Yet, they sought, some time after Henry VIII to morph the priesthood into a pastorship, thus their orders were lost. What price, unity?

I receive the Saint of the Day from American Catholic and therefore get a daily dose of Saintly influence. Many of their lives bring me to tears. Every Catholic should read the lives of the Saints. We have nothing to complain about whatsoever by comparison, and everything to admire.

You lost me. I can’t see the connection with the saints of the day and the topic of traditionalism and religious life.

Help me out here. Can you develop this a little more? Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[po18guy]

You lost me. I can’t see the connection with the saints of the day and the topic of traditionalism and religious life.

Help me out here. Can you develop this a little more? Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

(Tired) I was reflecting on how evangelicalism has a form of worship that is similar, in a way, to Franciscan practice. How the rebellion forced changes in worship due to the loss of the mass.

The Saints mention is just a stream of consciousness thing. In reading their lives, I have a much better idea of religious life and its struggles through the ages.

I’m left-handed. Sometimes, my own thoughts lose me.

 

[JReducation]

(Tired) I was reflecting on how evangelicalism has a form of worship that is similar, in a way, to Franciscan practice. How the rebellion forced changes in worship due to the loss of the mass.

The Saints mention is just a stream of consciousness thing. In reading their lives, I have a much better idea of religious life and its struggles through the ages.

I’m left-handed. Sometimes, my own thoughts lose me.

I believe this is a perfect example of the influence that religious life has had in Christianity. We can see traces all over the place, in Catholicism, Protestantism and in secular society too.

If you look at the great churches of Europe, many of them either were monastery churches or copied them. Benedictines and Cistercians had beautiful churches attached to their monasteries.

The Gospel of Success came out of Luther’s reaction to the Franciscans. He viewed Francis of Assisi in a very negative light, because of Francis’ romance with Lady Poverty. As we can see, even a falsehood has its roots in religious life. It’s often a reaction.

The modern day tent preachers, for lack of a better term, is a Protestant version of the old mendicant preachers who preached in the town square, men like St. Dominic and St. Anthony of Padua.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[GaryTaylor]

When we focus of the CC over the centuries. At a fast glance we often hear the comments that we lost this or changed that. Vatican II always comes to mind. Its very difficult to conceive a period in time that we did not live in. It requires study and in essense a meditation that place’s you in that period. Then you can gain a glimpe into a past period. Add to this a quick dismissal of the modern Popes intellect and goal, and understanding fast becomes misunderstand.

To quickly read a modern Pope and then compare say Pope Benedict to Pope Pius XXII. One always has to consider the period, while looking toward the future.

A great example is V-II and Pope Paul VI. Here you have a Pope when studied and read, you quickly realize he knew Pope Pius XII very well. He advised him on many issues including Vatican City, and the evils of that period such as Mussolini. Of couse this isn’t to say Pope Pius XII didn’t have some wonderful things to say about the Kingdom of God, and did some marvelous deeds in his reign. All of this was observed by both Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI. They were with him and part of this so was Blessed John Paul II and abit later Pope Benedict XVI.

The visions became different is this aspect. The Catholic Church in many ways in the pre 55 period was turned inward with its theology. The thinking was much more, well here we are and here is the truth. And while this is absolute and correct, also is the thinking of Pope Paul for example when his theology became, lets turn the church outward in true religious freedom. For the religious freedom doesn’t exist only inward. With and ever growing world, ever devoloping be it for the better or worse in specific areas. The church must be there. That is true religious freedom.

The readings of the Saints is another area quickly dismissed today, even to a degree by Catholics. Tragic, there through these lives are the literal road-map to heaven and given to all who seek the truth. While we must participate in this physical realm, all it is and highly over-rated. Not to say that life isn’t a beauty or the world that God created isn’t a beauty. Yet the vanity of this world is so prevelant its astounding.

Catholic’s/Christians must learn what it is to offend God again. We must continue to pray and worship correctly so the Lord does not allow us to fall, especially when the consequence is a known to us. In the mirror of humility we must see ourselves clearly, and see God always. Here we can realize and be reminded that all good has a source, and that souce is not us, but the Lord. It is he who holds us up, without Him we are powerless. Its far by me to judge another who in truth in the CC worship I have no idea exactly how they live. Maybe their is something to learn, and exchage which leads to greater depth. How often does one sentence affect a life?

Correctly stated the Kingdom of God is within you. Thus when we state we are made perfect in Gods image. That perfection is often confused with self-admiration of the physical self. For within is the Soul, their we can begin to touch upon the perfect and image of God. Vanity, self-admiration, all tools of the devil, and which he has perfected use of. We see the total detactment of the self on the Cross. God himself, and what did He have on the Cross but eternal salvation, and a reminder to all of us. Afflicted, didn’t even have a shirt on His back, no-weath, no desire for power, total detachment of the physical self. Of couse His purpose also transended this. However we seem to have drifted futher from the truth especially in areas such as the USA and West. Not all but to a great extent.

I still attend church now and again I was raised in during V-I. And I still see the same individuals in the same pews. Which also is a Blessing. Yet their was a Sacred Secret being kept by most of that period. We have to look more to the idea today that we can’t keep it unless we give it away. Thats how Love is correctly understood. You can’t hoard it, hold its, keep it, you can only give it away. And without the expectation of some fair exchange.

From here I “think” we begin to see different Christian aspects in their correct light today. Obviously we all have our faults. IMHO the grave error in the aspects of denominations outside the CC is with the Blessed Mother, and our Lords desire to place the Immaculate Heart of Mary next to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Which in truth would be clearly discussed with St Catherine Laboure and so many others along with the Popes. This Saint comes immediately to mind since on the back of the metal. this is exactly what you see, the two-hearts side by side.

However, when we view aspects of the CC such as above, or TLM to the Novus or Charismatic. Following the teachings of the church and correctly understanding still becomes the focal point. Should we do this in a Latin mass or English, or more quietly etc. Not so much the concern as correctly understanding what you are doing in correct worship, and the intention, and understanding where each other is coming from. And a extreme senerio would be the SSXP. For example I can relate to that. I was Baptized into it. But I just firmly believe there’s an error in their theology. In 1955 it would have been perfect, but we moved on. Its sort of like saying by this thinking, why don’t we worship exactly as the apostles did in the catacombs? Would they not be correct in their form of worship? Oh I believe so.

Mysticism is only obtained as I destribed above, prayer, constant prayer leads you to its door which is God in your Soul. Humility, correct Love and State of Grace are required. From there its time and Gods will. Constant Mass/Confession/Communion. This is all well written about. One Catholic Mass over another won’t score better in this arena. This is through Gods will as He wills and your abilty to tap into the self. This has nothing to do with a TLM a Novus or Charismatic.

Peace

 

[JReducation]

When we focus of the CC over the centuries. At a fast glance we often hear the comments that we lost this or changed that. Vatican II always comes to mind. Its very difficult to conceive a period in time that we did not live in. It requires study and in essense a meditation that place’s you in that period. Then you can gain a glimpe into a past period. Add to this a quick dismissal of the modern Popes intellect and goal, and understanding fast becomes misunderstand.

To quickly read a modern Pope and then compare say Pope Benedict to Pope Pius XXII. One always has to consider the period, while looking toward the future.

SNIPPED FOR SPACE

Peace

Help me out here. Connect all of this to religious life, because that’s the topic on the table: Tradition and religious life. I understand what you said and agree with it 100%, but don’t see the connection with the subject of the thread. I’m not sure how to respond without derailing. Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[GaryTaylor]

evangelize and ecumenical came more to mind.

Peace

 

[po18guy]

I believe this is a perfect example of the influence that religious life has had in Christianity. We can see traces all over the place, in Catholicism, Protestantism and in secular society too.

If you look at the great churches of Europe, many of them either were monastery churches or copied them. Benedictines and Cistercians had beautiful churches attached to their monasteries.

The Gospel of Success came out of Luther’s reaction to the Franciscans. He viewed Francis of Assisi in a very negative light, because of Francis’ romance with Lady Poverty. As we can see, even a falsehood has its roots in religious life. It’s often a reaction.

The modern day tent preachers, for lack of a better term, is a Protestant version of the old mendicant preachers who preached in the town square, men like St. Dominic and St. Anthony of Padua.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Here is an amazing YouTube video of Franciscan Capuchins presenting the perfect preacher in a town square: youtube.com/watch?v=cZ5aYoSr3Hg

It brings tears.

 

[JReducation]

Here is an amazing YouTube video of Franciscan Capuchins presenting the perfect preacher in a town square: youtube.com/watch?v=cZ5aYoSr3Hg

It brings tears.

This is an ancient custom that predates the Eucharistic processions, long before we had the Solemnity of Corpus Christi. The Blessed Sacrament would be taken through the streets in procession and it would be exposed in some predetermined spot. The Franciscans and Carmelites did this more than anyone else.

The Franciscans have an 800 year tradition of itinerant preaching. We partnered with our Dominican brethren. Itinerant preaching like this started to die out after the American, French and South American revolutions. The three revolutions gave birth to Anti-Catholicism. At first, it was very hostile.

This kind of itinerant preaching is not common today, because we’re always afraid that some nut job is going to shoot into the crowd of people or that the Blessed Sacrament can be desecrated. Back in the day, the worse that could happen was that people would throw their garbage at you.

It’s incredible. We tolerate a political demonstration, but we shoot into crowds of believers, be they Christians, Muslims, or Jews. What the intolerant don’t realize is that the first immigrants to arrive in North America were searching for the freedom to live their faith without persecution or that the Spaniards were the first Europeans to arrive in what is today the USA and they were Catholic. The first thing that they did when they hit land was to find a rock and celebrate mass. The Franciscans always sent a friar priest along with the expeditions and several non-clerical friars to care for the sick and the suffering.

The USA became so hostile toward Catholics that the Council of Baltimore ruled that priests and brothers were not to wear their cassocks or habits off Church property, but were to adopt the dress of the Episcopal clergy, which was the clerical shirt. As they blended in, they were less suspect of “Papism”.

It wasn’t until the founding the Sisters of Charity by St.Elizabeth Ann Seton that the government in the USA took a more conciliatory tone toward Catholicism and these types of public expressions of faith were again seen in our country. This was because the Sisters of Charity provided something that the states needed and could not provide.

The Sisters of Charity started hospitals, schools and homes for the poor. The states did not have a welfare system and could not afford one. The sisters created the school lunchroom program, which would eventually be taken over by the USDA and the former HEW. Had the state paid the sisters instead of creating public entitlement programs, they probably would not have gone bankrupt and would have better services for the poor.

Many Catholics in this country will have to answer to God for this. Much of this happened because Catholics failed to speak up in defense of the apostolic works of the religious orders and religious congregations. Too many became patriots first and Catholics second. They joined those who opposed tax dollars being used by religious.

In addition, this kind of expression of faith, as seen in this video, has become very risky, in part because of the insanity of our times and in part because Catholics are failing to denounce the current trend of intolerance toward Catholics.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[TrueLight]

Here is an amazing YouTube video of Franciscan Capuchins presenting the perfect preacher in a town square: youtube.com/watch?v=cZ5aYoSr3Hg

It brings tears.

It really touched me too when I saw it months ago. But then I found out that all the kneeling wasn’t really spontaneous as a lot of the kneeling came from people who were part of the whole event, so I wasn’t so impressed. I like the idea though.

We had a long thread on this flash mob.

 

[po18guy]

This is an ancient custom that predates the Eucharistic processions, long before we had the Solemnity of Corpus Christi. The Blessed Sacrament would be taken through the streets in procession and it would be exposed in some predetermined spot. The Franciscans and Carmelites did this more than anyone else.

The Franciscans have an 800 year tradition of itinerant preaching. We partnered with our Dominican brethren. Itinerant preaching like this started to die out after the American, French and South American revolutions. The three revolutions gave birth to Anti-Catholicism. At first, it was very hostile.

This kind of itinerant preaching is not common today, because we’re always afraid that some nut job is going to shoot into the crowd of people or that the Blessed Sacrament can be desecrated. Back in the day, the worse that could happen was that people would throw their garbage at you.

It’s incredible. We tolerate a political demonstration, but we shoot into crowds of believers, be they Christians, Muslims, or Jews. What the intolerant don’t realize is that the first immigrants to arrive in North America were searching for the freedom to live their faith without persecution or that the Spaniards were the first Europeans to arrive in what is today the USA and they were Catholic. The first thing that they did when they hit land was to find a rock and celebrate mass. The Franciscans always sent a friar priest along with the expeditions and several non-clerical friars to care for the sick and the suffering.

The USA became so hostile toward Catholics that the Council of Baltimore ruled that priests and brothers were not to wear their cassocks or habits off Church property, but were to adopt the dress of the Episcopal clergy, which was the clerical shirt. As they blended in, they were less suspect of “Papism”.

It wasn’t until the founding the Sisters of Charity by St.Elizabeth Ann Seton that the government in the USA took a more conciliatory tone toward Catholicism and these types of public expressions of faith were again seen in our country. This was because the Sisters of Charity provided something that the states needed and could not provide.

The Sisters of Charity started hospitals, schools and homes for the poor. The states did not have a welfare system and could not afford one. The sisters created the school lunchroom program, which would eventually be taken over by the USDA and the former HEW. Had the state paid the sisters instead of creating public entitlement programs, they probably would not have gone bankrupt and would have better services for the poor.

Many Catholics in this country will have to answer to God for this. Much of this happened because Catholics failed to speak up in defense of the apostolic works of the religious orders and religious congregations. Too many became patriots first and Catholics second. They joined those who opposed tax dollars being used by religious.

In addition, this kind of expression of faith, as seen in this video, has become very risky, in part because of the insanity of our times and in part because Catholics are failing to denounce the current trend of intolerance toward Catholics.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

In another thread, Cardinal Burke is being criticized for stating in an interview that the Church in America is ‘well on its way’ to persecution. We need not be prophets - only historians.

 

[JReducation]

It really touched me too when I saw it months ago. But then I found out that all the kneeling wasn’t really spontaneous as a lot of the kneeling came from people who were part of the whole event, so I wasn’t so impressed. I like the idea though.

We had a long thread on this flash mob.

Brother explained that in an interview. They needed Catholics who knew what to do before the Blessed Sacrament. This would help others how to show proper respect.

The point that many Catholics missed was the custom. This is what drives the Capuchin Franciscans crazy. Archbishop Chaput and Cardinal O’Malley are always harping on this to the people of their dioceses. The itinerant preacher is an ancient Franciscan custom. The sister going from store to store early in the morning or late at night to beg for food is an old custom of the Little Sisters of the Poor. Combining theological study and prayer is an 800 year Dominican custom. Walking the streets without doing anything or just living in a neighborhood without doing anything is an old custom of the Little Brothers of Jesus and so forth.

When people saw this video, they focused so much on what the people around the brothers were doing or not doing, that they lost sight of what the brothers wanted them to see. The brothers wanted people to see was Christ going out to meet his people. The important thing is what Christ is doing, not what the people did. That’s secondary. In the end, the people would go home and talk about what they saw or think about it. Had Christ not entered into their presence, they would have nothing to talk or think about. The fact that the video is still being watched and discussed is a sign. Once Christ enters the marketplace, his presence leaves a lasting impression. It cannot be easily forgotten.

We have to learn to think beyond short-term results. We also have to look at things like this and celebrate the fact that Catholic Tradition is still alive and well. The itinerant mendicant friar is part of Catholic Tradition. THAT should excite us.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

 

[TrueLight]

Brother explained that in an interview. They needed Catholics who knew what to do before the Blessed Sacrament. This would help others how to show proper respect.

The point that many Catholics missed was the custom. This is what drives the Capuchin Franciscans crazy. Archbishop Chaput and Cardinal O’Malley are always harping on this to the people of their dioceses. The itinerant preacher is an ancient Franciscan custom. The sister going from store to store early in the morning or late at night to beg for food is an old custom of the Little Sisters of the Poor. Combining theological study and prayer is an 800 year Dominican custom. Walking the streets without doing anything or just living in a neighborhood without doing anything is an old custom of the Little Brothers of Jesus and so forth.

When people saw this video, they focused so much on what the people around the brothers were doing or not doing, that they lost sight of what the brothers wanted them to see. The brothers wanted people to see was Christ going out to meet his people. The important thing is what Christ is doing, not what the people did. That’s secondary. In the end, the people would go home and talk about what they saw or think about it. Had Christ not entered into their presence, they would have nothing to talk or think about. The fact that the video is still being watched and discussed is a sign. Once Christ enters the marketplace, his presence leaves a lasting impression. It cannot be easily forgotten.

We have to learn to think beyond short-term results. We also have to look at things like this and celebrate the fact that Catholic Tradition is still alive and well. The itinerant mendicant friar is part of Catholic Tradition. THAT should excite us.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

Sigh.

 

[JReducation]

In another thread, Cardinal Burke is being criticized for stating in an interview that the Church in America is ‘well on its way’ to persecution. We need not be prophets - only historians.

I read a few statements by the major opponent in that thread. He does not know much about the Church. He starts by arguing against the point that the article refers to Cardinal Burke as one of the highest ranking cardinals. He goes on to say that Cardinal Burke is “only” a cardinal deacon. The fact that he’s a cardinal deacon and not a cardinal priest does not change the fact the he holds third most powerful office in the Catholic Church.

Then there are the Catholics on that thread who are arguing that the Constitution protects our rights. They forget or don’t know that George Washington wrote letters to different people warning them to keep an eye on the Papists, because their loyalty was suspect. We now have Patriot Act S 87 which is very unclear. The Dept of HHS new ruling which is also very unclear.

I don’t want to get into a discussion about these pieces of law, but to point out what can happen when the Catholic treats the Constitution as if it were the Fifth Gospel.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[po18guy]

I read a few statements by the major opponent in that thread. He does not know much about the Church. He starts by arguing against the point that the article refers to Cardinal Burke as one of the highest ranking cardinals. He goes on to say that Cardinal Burke is “only” a cardinal deacon. The fact that he’s a cardinal deacon and not a cardinal priest does not change the fact the he holds third most powerful office in the Catholic Church.

Then there are the Catholics on that thread who are arguing that the Constitution protects our rights. They forget or don’t know that George Washington wrote letters to different people warning them to keep an eye on the Papists, because their loyalty was suspect. We now have Patriot Act S 87 which is very unclear. The Dept of HHS new ruling which is also very unclear.

I don’t want to get into a discussion about these pieces of law, but to point out what can happen when the Catholic treats the Constitution as if it were the Fifth Gospel.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

George Santayana had something to say about remembering the past.

 

[JReducation]

George Santayana had something to say about remembering the past.

I believe that we must look in both directions. The present is built upon the past. It is also a development of the past. There is wonderful article on this subject on EWTN news by the Vicar General of Opus Dei. He said that the continuity is preserved by building on the past, not just repeating it over and over again. There are to parts to continuity. You preserve and you develop at the same time. The present can help us understand the past, because it should speak about it in a manner that today’s man can understand it.

In this thread, we’re supposed to be discussing religious and traditionalism. The way to understand this is to remember that religious are essential to Catholic tradition. They are not an accident nor are they dispensable. Their place cannot be occupied by the clergy or the laity. It can only be occupied by the consecrated man or woman. Even if religious life takes on new apostolates, new ways of dressing or new ways of praying, the one thing that is brought forward from the past is the act of consecration. That cannot be changed and has not been changed. Nor can the place of the religious in the plan salvation be changed or altered in any way. The Church has made this very clear and it’s not up for discussion. The Church does not want to discuss it, with religious or laity. Vita Consacrata pulled from the past and explained the theology of religious life in today’s language, but without changing it and did not leave room for dialogue. It was signed by the pope and sent out in a rather authoritarian manner.

Those of us who are religious did not know it was coming. Superiors were never asked for (name removed by moderator)ut. They simply woke up one morning and there it was, the sequel to Perfectae Caritatis.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[jwinch2]

Brother,

Thank you for your contributions in this thread. As always, you bring significant insight and clarity to the issue at hand.

I have browsed several of the threads referenced here but refrained from jumping in because I can see that it is going nowhere. I am glad that you provided information on the Charismatic aspect of Church Tradition and its origins.

I admit frustration with some on the forum who seem to think that the only things which are traditional are the EF of the Mass and solemn piety. According to many, we are not to experience any emotion during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. When I read those words I find myself wondering how people can explain Dominic weeping during the Mass or the writings of Timothy Radcliffe talking about the joy that he experienced in celebrating the liturgy with the Dominican family around the world. I read about how only chant and organ are proper in the Mass and then I think of Radcliffe describing a Sister playing acoustic guitar and signing to the Paschal Candle during the Easter Vigil and how transfixed he was by the moment. Organic changes introduced to the Mass prior to Vatican II were proper and appropriate but holding hands during the Our Father which is organic is a protestant introduction. Never mind the fact that in countries such as Brasil they have been holding hands during the Our Father for decades and only in recent years have protestants started making any real inroads.

Some will probably feel that I am not being charitable, but I have to say that I have begun to feel that many who claim to be traditional on this forum are nothing of the sort. They are focused on the EF of the Mass and the Council of Trent. If it falls outside of those two areas, they will probably claim it is not traditional, even if it predates those two things. That isn’t tradition, that is blindness.

Sorry for the rambling. I’m tired and getting a bit sick of seeing this stuff on CAF.

Peace,

 

[po18guy]

Brother,

Thank you for your contributions in this thread. As always, you bring significant insight and clarity to the issue at hand.

I have browsed several of the threads referenced here but refrained from jumping in because I can see that it is going nowhere. I am glad that you provided information on the Charismatic aspect of Church Tradition and its origins.

I admit frustration with some on the forum who seem to think that the only things which are traditional are the EF of the Mass and solemn piety. According to many, we are not to experience any emotion during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. When I read those words I find myself wondering how people can explain Dominic weeping during the Mass or the writings of Timothy Radcliffe talking about the joy that he experienced in celebrating the liturgy with the Dominican family around the world. I read about how only chant and organ are proper in the Mass and then I think of Radcliffe describing a Sister playing acoustic guitar and signing to the Paschal Candle during the Easter Vigil and how transfixed he was by the moment. Organic changes introduced to the Mass prior to Vatican II were proper and appropriate but holding hands during the Our Father which is organic is a protestant introduction. Never mind the fact that in countries such as Brasil they have been holding hands during the Our Father for decades and only in recent years have protestants started making any real inroads.

Some will probably feel that I am not being charitable, but I have to say that I have begun to feel that many who claim to be traditional on this forum are nothing of the sort. They are focused on the EF of the Mass and the Council of Trent. If it falls outside of those two areas, they will probably claim it is not traditional, even if it predates those two things. That isn’t tradition, that is blindness.

Sorry for the rambling. I’m tired and getting a bit sick of seeing this stuff on CAF.

Peace,

Insightful. Well said.

 

[jwinch2]

Insightful. Well said.

Thank you,

 

[TrueLight]

Brother,

Thank you for your contributions in this thread. As always, you bring significant insight and clarity to the issue at hand.

I have browsed several of the threads referenced here but refrained from jumping in because I can see that it is going nowhere. I am glad that you provided information on the Charismatic aspect of Church Tradition and its origins.

I admit frustration with some on the forum who seem to think that the only things which are traditional are the EF of the Mass and solemn piety. According to many, we are not to experience any emotion during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. When I read those words I find myself wondering how people can explain Dominic weeping during the Mass or the writings of Timothy Radcliffe talking about the joy that he experienced in celebrating the liturgy with the Dominican family around the world. I read about how only chant and organ are proper in the Mass and then I think of Radcliffe describing a Sister playing acoustic guitar and signing to the Paschal Candle during the Easter Vigil and how transfixed he was by the moment. Organic changes introduced to the Mass prior to Vatican II were proper and appropriate but holding hands during the Our Father which is organic is a protestant introduction. Never mind the fact that in countries such as Brasil they have been holding hands during the Our Father for decades and only in recent years have protestants started making any real inroads.

Some will probably feel that I am not being charitable, but I have to say that I have begun to feel that many who claim to be traditional on this forum are nothing of the sort. They are focused on the EF of the Mass and the Council of Trent. If it falls outside of those two areas, they will probably claim it is not traditional, even if it predates those two things. That isn’t tradition, that is blindness.

Sorry for the rambling. I’m tired and getting a bit sick of seeing this stuff on CAF.

Peace,

The first post was a rant born out of frustration. The thread struggled along and developed somewhat. Now you have brought it full circle.

I know as human beings, we need to rant, but what purpose does it serve to rant against a group except to incite defensiveness?

When I ranted about seeing a bunch of threads criticizing traditionalists, you told me that I should just avoid them.