Traditional Catholicism?

[Miles_Christi]

Now granted I haven’t been on the forums for a while, but it seems a bit asinine to me to have a entire new group for “Traditional Catholicism”. I follow Wdtprs and the New Liturgical Movement probably like the rest of you, but I honestly am not sure whether it is good to do this. I realize that is is good because it gives ppl the ability to learn more about “traditional Catholicism”, but on the flip side it also adds to the more than aggravating misconception that “traditional Catholics” and Latin Mass folk are not the same as the rest of us. I only mean to point out the pros and cons of this setup.

Miles_Christi

 

[ethelzguy]

Now granted I haven’t been on the forums for a while, but it seems a bit asinine to me to have a entire new group for “Traditional Catholicism”. I follow Wdtprs and the New Liturgical Movement probably like the rest of you, but I honestly am not sure whether it is good to do this. I realize that is is good because it gives ppl the ability to learn more about “traditional Catholicism”, but on the flip side it also adds to the more than aggravating misconception that “traditional Catholics” and Latin Mass folk are not the same as the rest of us. I only mean to point out the pros and cons of this setup.

Miles_Christi

I think the term “Tradtional Catholic”, or “Traditional Catholicism” has somewhat been hijacked by a group that might be more aptly called “those who reject the post-conciliar Church”. Hijacked in the sense that some protestants and most non-denominationals have hijacked the term “Christian”, as if Catholics aren’t.

Much of the discussion these days has more to do with a style of Cafeteria Catholicism than the days and ways of “old school” Catholics.

 

[Freshman88]

Much of the discussion these days has more to do with a style of Cafeteria Catholicism than the days and ways of “old school” Catholics.

nah nah, yo’ve got it all wrong. Much of the discussion has more to do with Catholics proving how much holier then thou they are because they feel threatened.

If you present a traditional argument around these parts, then you can expect to hear one of two responseses
a) how the poster you face is more humble and obedient then you because they keep their mouths and evidently, their eyes shut.

b) you are prideful and arrogant know it all for not accepting their views.

 

[ethelzguy]

nah nah, yo’ve got it all wrong. Much of the discussion has more to do with Catholics proving how much holier then thou they are because they feel threatened.

Sounds much like the rhetoric we’ve been hearing from the traditionalist crowd here. Your comment works both ways.

The VAST majority of the complaing here, and on some other sub-forums, is from those who bitterly oppose anything that the Church has done post-Vatican II…as if they were “cheated” out of something by the HMC herself.

Seems for some, the last 40 years has been something of a self-inflicted martyrdom. Sorry. The Church can do as she sees fit. The only ones “cheated” are those in their own little worlds.

I don’t see any NO/OF Catholics getting too upset by the recent moves toward the “tradtional” ways…rather, I see a lot of arrogant chest-beating by the traditional crowd, as if this was some battle to be won against the Church itself.

 

[Freshman88]

Sounds much like the rhetoric we’ve been hearing from the traditionalist crowd here. Your comment works both ways.

The VAST majority of the complaing here, and on some other sub-forums, is from those who bitterly oppose anything that the Church has done post-Vatican II…as if they were “cheated” out of something by the HMC herself.

Seems for some, the last 40 years has been something of a self-inflicted martyrdom. Sorry. The Church can do as she sees fit. The only ones “cheated” are those in their own little worlds.

I don’t see any NO/OF Catholics getting too upset by the recent moves toward the “tradtional” ways…rather, I see a lot of arrogant chest-beating by the traditional crowd, as if this was some battle to be won against the Church itself.

see, didn’t take too long to make my point?

arrogance, self-inflicted martyrdom, etc… see, we traditionalists are just no good!

 

[Tommy_Joe]

I spend most of my time here in the “Traditional” sub-forum simply due to the fact that I agree with a few more people *here *than I do in many of the other sub-forums.

I wish the discussions here could be as pleasant as those that take place outside our “traditional” church after Mass every Sunday, but with literally scores of forum members who call themselves “Traditional”, each of which have opinions that range from “the Novus Ordo is ok, but it’s not my cup of tea.”, to “there hasn’t been a Pope for years and the Novus Ordo is the work of Satan”. you’re gonna see a lot of un-Christian discussions. In spite of that, I think it’s an “interesting” place.

 

[I_Believe]

Now granted I haven’t been on the forums for a while, but it seems a bit asinine to me to have a entire new group for “Traditional Catholicism”. I follow Wdtprs and the New Liturgical Movement probably like the rest of you, but I honestly am not sure whether it is good to do this. I realize that is is good because it gives ppl the ability to learn more about “traditional Catholicism”, but on the flip side it also adds to the more than aggravating misconception that “traditional Catholics” and Latin Mass folk are not the same as the rest of us. I only mean to point out the pros and cons of this setup.

Miles_Christi

There is division. What enabled this division ?

Used to be, there are some things catholics just don’t do.

An example would be women standing at the altar. Women can’t be priests, but they can now do things priests do. Administer the Sacrament of Holy Communion. Same with male laity. Why ? What possible reason can be given for this, other than so we can get out of Mass faster ? Is that a justifiable reason ?

How about reading bulletin anouncements while the collection is being taken ? What is the point in that nonsense ? Is the K of C pancake breakfast next week so important we can have an intermission during the Mass to announce it ? If so, why are they wasting money and paper printing bulletins ? It’s not unique to the OF either. I went to a local SSPX Mass, and the priest did it before his homily ! So much for finding a more reverent Mass at the local SSPX Chapel

How about respect for the Blessed Sacrament ? I can’t find a single Mass in my town where the people can keep their mouths shut after Sunday Mass. It’s sickening to hear the murmur of mundane conversation immediately after Mass. It’s a Catholic church, not a bingo hall ! Funny thing is, the weekday OF I attend doesn’t have this problem. I suspect it is because the folks attending weekday Mass are catholics. The majority of those at Sunday Mass are posers, going through the motions.

They make me sick.

 

[GerardP]

I spend most of my time here in the “Traditional” sub-forum simply due to the fact that I agree with a few more people *here *than I do in many of the other sub-forums.

I wish the discussions here could be as pleasant as those that take place outside our “traditional” church after Mass every Sunday, but with literally scores of forum members who call themselves “Traditional”, each of which have opinions that range from “the Novus Ordo is ok, but it’s not my cup of tea.”, to “there hasn’t been a Pope for years and the Novus Ordo is the work of Satan”. you’re gonna see a lot of un-Christian discussions. In spite of that, I think it’s an “interesting” place.

Where ever you have Catholicism, you are going to have a fight. That’s what being a member of the Church Militant means. That’s why you get slapped across the face at confirmation. You are being reminded that you are a soldier for Christ.

Pleasant conversations are for people of good-will who are agreed in seeking the truth. Nasty conversations are for people opposed to each other or one person opposed to the truth. Soft words are only one method of evangelization and defense of the faith.

 

[GerardP]

The VAST majority of the complaing here, and on some other sub-forums, is from those who bitterly oppose anything that the Church has done post-Vatican II…as if they were “cheated” out of something by the HMC herself.

Actualy the vast majority of complaining here is from people who oppose traditionalists pointing out the very real problems that are going on in the Church and where the people mainly responsible for dealing with it are failing. Those who think the “Holy Spirit” is guiding everything from the traffic in the parking lot to the air-conditioning get very upset when you rain on their parade.

Seems for some, the last 40 years has been something of a self-inflicted martyrdom. Sorry. The Church can do as she sees fit. The only ones “cheated” are those in their own little worlds.

Sounds like you’re describing our beleagured Pope who wrote in 2004 that he could only stand sorrowing in the liturgical ruins that he’d hoped to avoid on the eve of the Council.

I don’t see any NO/OF Catholics getting too upset by the recent moves toward the “tradtional” ways…rather, I see a lot of arrogant chest-beating by the traditional crowd, as if this was some battle to be won against the Church itself.

It is a battle to be won FOR the Church WITHIN the Church. It wasn’t Holy Mother Church who suppressed the TLM, it was those in charge of protecting that liturgy that purposely let it fall into ruin.

The lack of Militancy on the part of “O.F.” or “conservative” Catholic can be ascribed to two reasons.

First, the more traditional they get, the more they realize how good it is for them. Like discovering a fine restaurant after years of McDonald’s.

Second,they are so docile, they will not fight for anything.
They wouldn’t fight when sacred things are taken away, they won’t fight to keep any of the Church’s treasures or the trash that has been heaped upon them in bad liturgies for years.

One of the most interesting events of 2004 was watching the 'conservative" mainstream catholics in the media start to divide themselves when “the Passion of the Christ” was released. That movie, with it’s so clear Catholic understanding made people make a decision. That’s what Christ does. The fence-sitting of conservatives is going to come to a close soon.

 

[CassiusLonginus]

How about reading bulletin anouncements while the collection is being taken ? What is the point in that nonsense ? Is the K of C pancake breakfast next week so important we can have an intermission during the Mass to announce it ? If so, why are they wasting money and paper printing bulletins ? It’s not unique to the OF either. I went to a local SSPX Mass, and the priest did it before his homily ! So much for finding a more reverent Mass at the local SSPX Chapel

Uh…the way the SSPX does it is perfectly fine. When the priest goes to say the sermon this is the time for announcements since this is not technically a part of the Mass. Just thought I’d share.

 

[I_Believe]

Uh…the way the SSPX does it is perfectly fine. When the priest goes to say the sermon this is the time for announcements since this is not technically a part of the Mass. Just thought I’d share.

Fair enough, but why is it needed ?

I dunno, it just irritates me. I can read.

Was this done before VII ?

 

[I_Believe]

Just to add… I perhaps could understand an important announcement, but yard sales and pot luck dinners ? Mercy.

 

[csr]

One thing I enjoy is hearing modernist Catholics fatuously proclaiming “I am a traditional Catholic”.

These are the same Catholics who have do so much injury to the Church.

Incidentally I really enjoyed ca080326b.mp3, over on the radio section of Catholic.com. A guest did a really nice job of explaining how the Church has been demasculinized and made basically insipid.

Traditional Catholics were never insipid.

 

[thecoach]

nah nah, yo’ve got it all wrong. Much of the discussion has more to do with Catholics proving how much holier then thou they are because they feel threatened.

If you present a traditional argument around these parts, then you can expect to hear one of two responseses
a) how the poster you face is more humble and obedient then you because they keep their mouths and evidently, their eyes shut.

b) you are prideful and arrogant know it all for not accepting their views.

AMEN Freshman!!!

 

[Unitas]

see, didn’t take too long to make my point?

 

[ethelzguy]

Uh…the way the SSPX does it is perfectly fine. When the priest goes to say the sermon this is the time for announcements since this is not technically a part of the Mass. Just thought I’d share.

The homily is not “technically part of the Mass”? :bigyikes:

 

[Miles_Christi]

What I meant to relay in my original question was the tension that may inevitably exist between those who call themselves “traditional Catholics” and those who may have no idea what it means to be a “traditional” Catholic. I think that it is good and fine to have a forum dedicated to “traditional Catholicism” for the purposes of explaining and teaching others about it who otherwise do not know, but the forum should also serve as a means to bridge the gap and work toward reconciliation and greater solidarity amongst all Catholics, for there is one body and one head, one Lord.

And as an aside, I have been told by certain people I know who are either high ranking people in the Church (Roman Curia, aides, and staff), have worked for them in the past, or are personal friends of them and/or Pope Benedict himself. I’m not going to “name-drop” here, but the point is that it is my understanding that Pope Benedict has often (in private) expressed that there would be nothing doctrinally in error in the future if the Church returned to one form of Mass (in the Latin Rite), one missal rubrically and textually the same to be said in both Latin and the vernacular languages in close cooperation with Rome and the local Episcopal conferences to get the translations as close as possible in thse vernacular languages. I only offer this as hear-say at this point, but you never know…

 

[CassiusLonginus]

The homily is not “technically part of the Mass”? :bigyikes:

Correct. It happens “at Mass”, but it’s not actually a part “of the Mass”.

 

[ethelzguy]

Correct. It happens “at Mass”, but it’s not actually a part “of the Mass”.

mmmmmmmmm…tell that to the folks who get their knickers in a knot when someone other than a priest or deacon speaks during that period called “homily”

 

[CassiusLonginus]

mmmmmmmmm…tell that to the folks who get their knickers in a knot when someone other than a priest or deacon speaks during that period called “homily”

When the priest puts his maniple on the bible it signifies that the Mass has ‘stopped’. That’s why the epistle and gospel are read in a non-sacred language (i.e. the vernacular). However, there is still (or should still be) a distinction between who is allowed in the sanctuary (or rather, in the whatchamacallit where the lay people shouldn’t be). Also, it is required that an ordained person give the sermon (at least at the TLM). I’ll have to look at what the OF says, but regardless, the celebrant of the Mass should *usually *be the one giving the sermon.