And this proves what? I had fun during my high school and college years but why would I want to return to my days of no paychecks or the Vietnam war hanging over my head among other things? There are far more interesting challenges in today’s world and I’m glad not all people are of nostalgic mindsets such as you picture.
Proves the same thing as those who claim that so many want Mass in Latin back, I suppose.
I would be very curious about what makes you more obedient than those who like the EF Mass? Just how is appreciating a valid and licit form of Mass disobedient? I suppose that all the Eastern Catholics are very disobedient since none of them seem to be that crazy about your preferred form of Mass.Actually, if you look more closely, most of it is in response to the TLM crowd inciting NO bashing, and we obedient Catholics feel obligated to defend and respond.
If only it were “appreciation”. But, it’s not. It’s a rallying cry for those who put themselves above the Church. It’s a means for self-appointed Catholic elitists to pontificate as to how much more holy they are than the rest of us mere mortal obedient Catholics.
Do you think that Monsignor R. Michael Schmitz (Vicar General Provincial Superior for the United States for the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest) is a self-appointed Catholic elitist who pontificates about how much more holy he is than the rest of you mere mortal obedient Catholics? After all, he is the provincial superior of an institute which celebrates the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite exclusively.
That really is a mighty broad generalization. What I see the most of here is you railing against the TLM even though the Holy Father has stated that it is a valid and licit form of Mass which should be made available to the Church. Your position isn’t an example of obedience, and sounds much more like a person placing themself above the Church than any so-called traditionalist around here has done. Regardless of what you believe, there is no teaching in the Church that one cannot prefer one form of Mass over another, or advocate for greater fidelity to tradition in the liturgy. Many great saints spent a great part of their time doing just that.
Where have I “railed” against the TLM? I have spoken vigorously against the concept that it is “better” than the NO, no doubt.
Have you? I don’t think so. Sure, you have argued your position opposing a liberal availability of the TLM based on some concept of popularity or democracy, an idea completely foreign to Catholic thinking. And you have criticized those who desire a greater availability of the TLM as if doing so would somehow deny you of some right or privilege, even though you argue for doing that very thing to them. And most importantly you make vast, sweeping generalizations about anybody who promotes the TLM or traditional Catholicism as being disobedient or engaged in dissent, without ever trying to explain how your disagreement and criticism of the Holy Father’s position on this issue is somehow other than disobedience itself. In all honesty the only pedestal I can see is the one you keep climbing up on.
Do y’all really think going back and forth like this is accomplishing anything. The thread is on the liturgy, not I said, you said. If you like the Novus Ordo, OK. If you like The Latin Mass, OK. Going back and forth like this on so many threads by so many people tends to cloud the issue. We are after all, discussing the reenactment of the Sacrifice of Calvary. The most important thing that ever happened for us all. Remember that in the “DISCUSSION”.
I think you have missed the real issue here, and in most of these threads. You see this as “I said, you said” but it is really about a widespread refusal to allow or support a wider availability of the EF for those who feel called to worship in that manner. The debates usually come down to that, regardless of where they start. Traditionalists seek ready access to the Masses which they find most appropriate to their spirituality, and the wider culture in the Church has resisted this. There are many reasons for this ranging from perceived threats to their own way of worship to resentment of traditionalists themselves. But, it is not unreasonable to really focus in on and discuss that real resistance when it arises and to try to shine a light on it.
This is utter, self-serving balderdash.
I see by your profile, you are not in union with the Roman Catholic Church. Just as we do not verbally attack your patriarch, please refrain from statements such as you made with reference to the Pope, whom we as Roman Catholics and those in union with us believe to be the Vicar of Christ on Earth. Jesus did say to Peter, "You (Peter) are rock and upon this rock I (Jesus) will build my (Jesus’) Church.
Deacon Ed,
P.Oh, please. There is nothing self-serving about understanding that mutual respect must be mutual. You argue only for what you already have, and never for what others lack. How is that not self-serving?
Sorry, but this is self serving and inaccurate. Ordinary doesn’t mean exclusive. Just because the EF is not the Ordinary form doesn’t mean its use should be resisted and denied. In this town I live in, which isn’t terribly large, there are five Catholic churches, one of which is Vietnamese. The smallest has about five Masses per week, and the largest has about twenty. Altogether there are somewhere around forty or fifty Masses each week, and all are OF. Not most. Not even all but one. ** All.** That is exclusive, not ordinary.
That is true. You are also under no obligation to pray for the dead, give to the poor, or anything else. But, you are also under no obligation to argue for restrictions against those you don’t like simply because you are already satisfied.
So, you support the wishes of the Holy Father on that? You believe and agree that the EF should be made available for all who wish it? Sorry, but that is not what I hear from you on this forum.
Oh, so just because the Holy Father makes it clear that the EF should be made available, you as a Catholic are not called upon to support that? Instead, you are called upon to resist it, and to call those who seek it disobedient? Makes perfect sense to me.
That is ridiculous. 100% of the Masses in this city are OF, and 0% are EF. You say that this reflects what Ordinary vs. Extraordinary means. I say this is not a good example of mutual respect, i.e. one person having a superabundance and refusing to allow anything for the other who has nothing at all, and that this should change if real respect would be present. And that is the cause of all the problems? Not the fact that people such as yourself have constantly insisted that 0% of the Masses is more than adequate for the other people, and that more Masses than you could ever attend is merely adequate for you? It is my language that has turned off so many people? That is really what I am supposed to believe?
You may want to rethink this one line. Just because we have free will, does not mean our moral obligations cease to exist.
Well, in a way, that was kind of my point, and I was using the possible multiple understandings of obligation to advance that. I don’t think our moral obligations to do good conveniently end when we are dealing with a group that irritates us for some reason. Those seeking the EF are not acting or desiring anything at odds with the Catholic life, and so should be supported not resisted. Some sort of suggestion that we should simply insist that 100% of all Masses being in the OF is somehow charitable regarding those desiring the EF falls way short of any kind of Catholic understanding of the issue, at least in my opinion.
What you fail to see, is that I (or the rest of the content NO crowd) are not responsible for, nor have authority over, the Mass we attend. “Superabundance” or otherwise. I have no authority to refuse to allow anything!!
