F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I think you know where I stand.
- Status
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
Well put, Bbigam. 
T
Timothysis
Guest
This is patently untrue. St. Agnes, not 5 minutes from the Cathedral that you attend, has had the Tridentine Mass at 9:30 am every Sunday and Holy Days since 1983. When I told you about this before you responded with *“its just a low Mass.” * It seems that you are not happy because it is not the form for which you wish. That’s fine, but it does not help your argument lamenting what you “lost” when still have and have had access to the latin Mass for the past 25 years.
It is not my intention to be mean spirited but what you are stating is simply not true.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
I am a registered member of the cathedral parish and have been since 1983. Pray, tell me, how I am to attend 10am Mass at the cathedral and the 9:30 TLM at St. Agnes. Bifurcate myself?
T
Timothysis
Guest
If it is your desire to attend the TLM, then you can. But please don’t be so disingenuous to claim that you “*don’t have access.” *
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I think the point is that the EF is offered in a place that it is not hardship for you to attend.
That you chose not to attend is not the fault of anyone else.
The Motu Proprio calls for a wider use of the EF, it does not require that every single persons preferences and schedules be met.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
Shall I fall on my sword? Would you have me abandon my parish? Would you have me give up my hopes for a sung Latin Mass at the cathedral? No, I didn’t sing in the cathedral choir for 20 years. Technically, sir, as you should know, there is an SSPX church out on Sherwood. I could go there too. If the TLM at St. Agnes were at 8 am, you would have no beef with me. Technically, I could drive down to New Orleans to St. Patrick’s, too. When I said I don’t have access, I don’t have access. This is an ad hominem assault and off topic.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
This is part of the point I was trying to make about “traditionalism”.
He does not have access as he wants it.
I
ibkc
Guest
Some of you are really vicious, you know that? 
T
Timothysis
Guest
The simple fact is that you claimed that you “*don’t have access” *to the TLM , yet the reality is that you do; it just isn’t the kind that you want. This is not an ad hominem assault nor is it off topic; it is, simply, the truth.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
What about changing parishes to the one that offers the EF, even if it isn’t exactly the way you want it to be celebrated, it has to be better than nothing.
C
chevalier
Guest
I was going to make a post, but Bbigam indeed said it. I have no issue with traditional attitudes per se, in fact, I hold a couple - and you could probably describe me as conservative overall (*knowing *what conservative means). What worries me–obviously apart from anti-CV2 attitudes–is when Traditionalist sentiments are held as part of a general stringent attitude of the older the better and the stricter the better (not only in matters of liturgy) or when Latin is regarded as some sort of magical language in which prayers are better than those in English or any other modern tongue. That danger is there especially for young Traditionalists who did *not *grow up remembering the Tridentine Mass. I don’t have any problem at all with people making mature choices or *getting *to their maturity, but I’m worried by some of the faces of Traditionalism I see.
For the record, I’m not a big fan of unnatural modernisation and abuse is a whole different matter altogether. I have some natural distrust of innovation, actually and even despite that I don’t really mind guitar itself at mass, just as long as it’s reverent and spiritually well-adjusted (i.e. when it doesn’t turn into a hippie concert) - after all, our forefathers of Israel did use that kind of instruments. If done right, it makes me feel somewhat closer to them at times. What I mind is irreverent performance or poor quality (it should not be just tapping and singing along) or when a minority spirituality seems to be being made the norm for all. For example loud shouting or even screaming might not be irreverent per se and it may well be well in place for certain youth groups passionately experiencing their faith (passionately in that particular sense), but it shouldn’t be done without warning on 60+ years old parishioners (whom I imagine to be having a much harder time than my own, which is already hard). Generally, liturgical celebrations for all the people should not be shaped according to the non-standard choices of a minority group of parishioners that have enough influence to shape the liturgy. At my parish you can generally guess which hour is which music on Sunday and weekdays are tame, which is a good thing, although on some occasions you might witness a congregation composed predominately of senior citizens being expected to sing along to modern ways of singing the Agnus or the Gloria or the Mystery of Faith. If that’s taxing on me on some days, it probably is much more so on them.
As far as Latin hymns go, yes, the use of Latin hymns or singing the Agnus or Gloria or other parts in Latin and the Gregorian way rather than the pop way does have a wonderful effect on the reverence of the congregation and does strengthen the consciousness of being in a special place at a special time. This I say even though I believe it’s not inherently better to sing in Latin than to sing in any other language.
For the record, I’ve heard Latin sung to the guitar, too.
Waitasec, I have participated. Don’t kill me. 
That was Taize in 1998 or 1999.
For the record, I’m not a big fan of unnatural modernisation and abuse is a whole different matter altogether. I have some natural distrust of innovation, actually and even despite that I don’t really mind guitar itself at mass, just as long as it’s reverent and spiritually well-adjusted (i.e. when it doesn’t turn into a hippie concert) - after all, our forefathers of Israel did use that kind of instruments. If done right, it makes me feel somewhat closer to them at times. What I mind is irreverent performance or poor quality (it should not be just tapping and singing along) or when a minority spirituality seems to be being made the norm for all. For example loud shouting or even screaming might not be irreverent per se and it may well be well in place for certain youth groups passionately experiencing their faith (passionately in that particular sense), but it shouldn’t be done without warning on 60+ years old parishioners (whom I imagine to be having a much harder time than my own, which is already hard). Generally, liturgical celebrations for all the people should not be shaped according to the non-standard choices of a minority group of parishioners that have enough influence to shape the liturgy. At my parish you can generally guess which hour is which music on Sunday and weekdays are tame, which is a good thing, although on some occasions you might witness a congregation composed predominately of senior citizens being expected to sing along to modern ways of singing the Agnus or the Gloria or the Mystery of Faith. If that’s taxing on me on some days, it probably is much more so on them.
As far as Latin hymns go, yes, the use of Latin hymns or singing the Agnus or Gloria or other parts in Latin and the Gregorian way rather than the pop way does have a wonderful effect on the reverence of the congregation and does strengthen the consciousness of being in a special place at a special time. This I say even though I believe it’s not inherently better to sing in Latin than to sing in any other language.
For the record, I’ve heard Latin sung to the guitar, too.
Waitasec, I have participated. Don’t kill me. That was Taize in 1998 or 1999.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
I have valid reasons for not changing parishes. As I said, if it were only a matter of attending a TLM, yes, I do have options. I would go to two Masses on Sunday if the TLM was offered at a time other than a time that conflicts with Mass at my parish in which I have been involved since 1983. It is not and thus is not available to me.
M
MonFrere
Guest
I was confirmed in 1964 and a few months after that my mom decided to follow a popular radio evangelist of that day and since my dad wasn’t religious I followed my mom. I didn’t return to the Catholic Church until the year 2000. So, I missed all the “transitional” goings on.
So, coming back everything was Novus Ordo and I was content. But finding my bearings was a task when all the residual fallout of Vatican II began to enter my conscience. The craziness from the “left” really didn’t resonate with me at all; so I wasn’t pulled in that direction. However, the craziness on the “right” was a bit more subtle. It took me a while to see it but the more “right leaning” some people were the more inclined they were to speak out against Vatican II or against the Pope or other aspects of the Church and having just come out of Protestantism and their almost inbred rebellion against authority, after gaining my bearings, this didn’t appeal to me either. To weave through all the opinion was a challenge because some of the complaints did seem to have some validity. It has also took some time to see the “range” of what I would call legitimate room for debate because some of these issues, especially concerning liturgy, do seem to have a legitimate degree of wiggle room. Personally, with the decisions of Pope Benedict, I do not have any problem with those that desire the traditional Latin Mass. I don’t “read into this decision” anything more than the Holy Father being wise to allow for this legitimate diversity in the Church. I think the Novus Ordo has a great deal going for it and I enjoy the power of its simplicity. I also think with the future of the Church and the need the Church and the Vatican seems to allow for indigenous cultures to express themselves with liturgical rubrics that best fit them – I think the Novus Ordo because of its simplicity will be a great means of allowing for the diversity that is going to make the Church even more “catholic/universal” and not so much “European”. I think the Vatican is being sensitive to these needs among the church universal. I think the need for universality due to the Protestant Reformation lead to the centuries following to have a NEED for uniformity – but with that now past us and the new approach to those non-Catholic religions via Vatican II – the Church is going back to its older norm to not be so rigid in its demand for complete liturgical uniformity. I see this as a wise decision. But because of true “liturgical abuse” that needs to addressed AT THE SAME TIME there is a real balancing act that need to be accomplished by the Vatican.
So, because of all this I simply have no problems with those that want to celebrate the Tridentine Mass; especially since approved by proper Church authority. Where I do have problems is when these people complain about the legitimacy of Vatican II, or think the Church is going on the verge of apostasy, or that the Pope is capitulating to grave error, etc. Though I don’t have much resonance with those on the “left” I am not tossing everything they bring to the table as not worthy of a good listen. Where I’ve come in these 9 years is that I need to know where I personally stand - BUT also know the “range” of legitimacy with those to my right and my left. IMO – this is the real challenge of being legitimately “catholic” in our outlook.
MonFrere
So, coming back everything was Novus Ordo and I was content. But finding my bearings was a task when all the residual fallout of Vatican II began to enter my conscience. The craziness from the “left” really didn’t resonate with me at all; so I wasn’t pulled in that direction. However, the craziness on the “right” was a bit more subtle. It took me a while to see it but the more “right leaning” some people were the more inclined they were to speak out against Vatican II or against the Pope or other aspects of the Church and having just come out of Protestantism and their almost inbred rebellion against authority, after gaining my bearings, this didn’t appeal to me either. To weave through all the opinion was a challenge because some of the complaints did seem to have some validity. It has also took some time to see the “range” of what I would call legitimate room for debate because some of these issues, especially concerning liturgy, do seem to have a legitimate degree of wiggle room. Personally, with the decisions of Pope Benedict, I do not have any problem with those that desire the traditional Latin Mass. I don’t “read into this decision” anything more than the Holy Father being wise to allow for this legitimate diversity in the Church. I think the Novus Ordo has a great deal going for it and I enjoy the power of its simplicity. I also think with the future of the Church and the need the Church and the Vatican seems to allow for indigenous cultures to express themselves with liturgical rubrics that best fit them – I think the Novus Ordo because of its simplicity will be a great means of allowing for the diversity that is going to make the Church even more “catholic/universal” and not so much “European”. I think the Vatican is being sensitive to these needs among the church universal. I think the need for universality due to the Protestant Reformation lead to the centuries following to have a NEED for uniformity – but with that now past us and the new approach to those non-Catholic religions via Vatican II – the Church is going back to its older norm to not be so rigid in its demand for complete liturgical uniformity. I see this as a wise decision. But because of true “liturgical abuse” that needs to addressed AT THE SAME TIME there is a real balancing act that need to be accomplished by the Vatican.
So, because of all this I simply have no problems with those that want to celebrate the Tridentine Mass; especially since approved by proper Church authority. Where I do have problems is when these people complain about the legitimacy of Vatican II, or think the Church is going on the verge of apostasy, or that the Pope is capitulating to grave error, etc. Though I don’t have much resonance with those on the “left” I am not tossing everything they bring to the table as not worthy of a good listen. Where I’ve come in these 9 years is that I need to know where I personally stand - BUT also know the “range” of legitimacy with those to my right and my left. IMO – this is the real challenge of being legitimately “catholic” in our outlook.
MonFrere
P
Patrick_Eastin
Guest
The topic of this thread is objection to traditionalism not the personal decisions of posters. Please return to the topic at hand.
C
CradleCath
Guest
Tricky position for most people…but **you **do it so well!!!
B
Bbigam
Guest
Thanks!Well put, Bbigam.
J
JustaServant
Guest
Over on the apologetics forum I started a thread called “Is the Logical Destination of Protestantism Theological Liberalism?” I see a definate connection between this subject and the former. If Protestantism, or a “Protestant mindset” within our Church, does indeed lead logically to theologial liberalism and indifference, then any opposition to that ‘freedom’ will be met with fierce opposition. It is ultimately opposition to authority, the foundation of Protestant philosophy. The ability to make private judgements.
So, is it tradition some object to? Or authority?
So, is it tradition some object to? Or authority?
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
I am deeply grieved. I am sorry I even started this thread. I love HMC and think that we have lost so much in the last 40+ years. I am not a triumphalist. I am an anthropologist who understands the importance of culture and tradition. In many ways, I am still that little Irish Catholic altar boy who deeply misses the silence, the stilling of one’s soul to repose in the presence of God which is missing today. I will be taken to task for that.
Our eastern brethren have their culture and tradition largely intact. Ours was ripped out and thrown away. Well, I am a good old rebel. Old times there are not forgotten. I apologize for this thread and I will ask the mod to close it.
No one objects to traditionalism, I have been told. The evidence just within this thread speaks otherwise.
Our eastern brethren have their culture and tradition largely intact. Ours was ripped out and thrown away. Well, I am a good old rebel. Old times there are not forgotten. I apologize for this thread and I will ask the mod to close it.
No one objects to traditionalism, I have been told. The evidence just within this thread speaks otherwise.
B
Bbigam
Guest
I’m confused. How have we given evidence that we object to traditionalism? Why are you sorry for this thread, and how will closing it help? I’m sorry but it sounds like you are trying to be offended and I haven’t seen people here trying to be offensive.
- Status