Why are traditionalist forums so appalling?

[CradleCath]

Quite simply it is more beautiful. To me, and it is only a subjective view Iknow but to me the Latin mass is far more aestheticaly pleasing than the vernacular. I taught myself the pater noster in Latin not to be snob but because it sounds so rooted, so meaningful. It sounds as if one is speaking a language reserved for communing with God.

I accept the vernacular. However I attend the mass in latin when able to nd I think it vastly superior aesthetically. I realise this is a secondary issue but catholicism has never been afraid of the aesthetic.

It IS more aestheticaly pleasing & the Church has played a leading part in the promotion of art, music, sacred archtecture & culture throughout the ages. Our Gregorian Chant, for instance…each piece was written with a particular prayer of the Mass in mind.

Plus, the Catholic Church had no equal in it’s sacred architecture. The best definition of architecture that has ever been given is likewise the shortest. It is “the** art **of building”. And when we say the art of building, the term must be held to imply **the giving to buildings of whatever beauty is consistent with **their primary purpose ****and with the resources that may be available. In all aesthetical ways the Church has failed miserably during the last 40 years. We have lost the sense of the sacred.

When I see pictures of the new Cathedral in Los Angelus, I find it a vulgar display of extravagance. When I enter the Basilica in St. Louis, I find a Sacred Space filled with awe & peace. When one leaves the vestibule (it’s not a “gathering space”) & opens the doors to the Church one’s eye is taken straight to the huge crucifix above the Tabernacle.

Since the King of the World had to be born in a stable, because it was the only place that Joseph & Mary could find…I think He deserves all the beauty we can give to Him…in the language that we use to pray the Mass & the surroundings in which we pray it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cathedral_Basilica_of_St._Louis.JPG

 

[CradleCath]

Thank God for Pope Benedict XVI.

I do that every day. And I also follow his wishes & pray for him, that he "may not flee for fear of the wolves”.

 

[CradleCath]

Your attitude seems reasonable to me. Just out of curiosity though, **why **should there be more Latin? What purpose does it serve, except to alienate those who don’t understand it? And I’m not sure what EF means.

Latin is the language of the Catholic Church. If you are a Catholic did you ever think that maybe you should educate yourself re the Latin language??

 

[seagal]

Latin is the language of the Catholic Church. If you are a Catholic did you ever think that maybe you should educate yourself re the Latin language??

Since I’m interested in languages, of course. But there are limited resources, even on the internet, for learning it. Every catholic I ask what a certain phrase meant didn’t know. In fact, in the choir when we’re learning latin songs the only person who could translate for us (this includes much older catholics than me) is a convert!

 

[Pat_the_elder]

Quite simply it is more beautiful. To me, and it is only a subjective view Iknow but to me the Latin mass is far more aestheticaly pleasing than the vernacular. I taught myself the pater noster in Latin not to be snob but because it sounds so rooted, so meaningful. It sounds as if one is speaking a language reserved for communing with God.

I accept the vernacular. However I attend the mass in latin when able to nd I think it vastly superior aesthetically. I realise this is a secondary issue but catholicism has never been afraid of the aesthetic.

Hmmm… Years ago I was talking to an old Catholic priest on the Scottish island of Benbecula. The discussion turned to a (then) young Scottish rock band who were mainly singing in Gaelic. This pleased the priest greatly as some of the songs had Christian roots and I remember him saying that English was okay for communicating between people but that Gaelic was definitely the language of God!

Pat

 

[CradleCath]

Since I’m interested in languages, of course. But there are limited resources, even on the internet, for learning it. Every catholic I ask what a certain phrase meant didn’t know. In fact, in the choir when we’re learning latin songs the only person who could translate for us (this includes much older catholics than me) is a convert!

I don’t know whether you just want to complain about eveything & everybody that is pre-Vatican II…or…are sincere about acquiring knowledge about the language of your Church. Just in case, the latter is the case:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=173658

 

[ibkc]

Since I’m interested in languages, of course. But there are limited resources, even on the internet, for learning it.

Huh? It’s not hard at all to find resources (on and off the net) to learn Latin. Pick what you want to focus on (classical vs. medieval vs. ecclesiastical, although the differences between the three aren’t that big of a deal) and go for it. Go to Amazon and type in “Latin”. Voila.

 

[Pat_the_elder]

Hmmm… Years ago I was talking to an old Catholic priest on the Scottish island of Benbecula. The discussion turned to a (then) young Scottish rock band who were mainly singing in Gaelic. This pleased the priest greatly as some of the songs had Christian roots and I remember him saying that English was okay for communicating between people but that Gaelic was definitely the language of God!

Pat

Ah, how the years take their toll on the memory… for 'twas Barra, not Benbecula. For those here that think this post has no relevance then think again. The discussion continued… I was a wee bit discomforted as my Gaelic only amounts to a phrase or two. Was this old man merely harking back to a simpler time before the English language encroached and subjugated his beloved Gaelic or was there a hint of arrogance behind his words. Was there a belief that those of us who did not have “the tongue” were in some ways having a second class communion with God? THe old so and so just laughed and never answered the question.

Pat

 

[numealinesimpet]

Ah, how the years take their toll on the memory… for 'twas Barra, not Benbecula. For those here that think this post has no relevance then think again. The discussion continued… I was a wee bit discomforted as my Gaelic only amounts to a phrase or two. Was this old man merely harking back to a simpler time before the English language encroached and subjugated his beloved Gaelic or was there a hint of arrogance behind his words. Was there a belief that those of us who did not have “the tongue” were in some ways having a second class communion with God? THe old so and so just laughed and never answered the question.

Pat

Aha, this 50/50 Irish Scot is tempted to weigh in here. Readers might know that Barra is a totally delightful, very tiny island in the Hebrides, ruled by the MacNeils. The castle has a balcony facing into the boundless ocean. During the Middle Ages, after the Main Meal of the day, the herald would go out onto the balcony, the trumpets would be sounded, and he would proclaim: “The Great MacNeil of Barra having finished his meal, the princes of Earth may dine!”

I suspect that most people feel that their mother-tongue (whichever it is) is the most appropriate for private prayers (I still hold to defending Latin for public, Liturgical prayer) … while Gaelic-speakers smile quizzically at the hybrid nature of English: (“What’s your word for ‘civilization?’ Ye haven’t got one, have ye??”) And Irish (of which Scottish Gaelic is a fairly recent descendent) is notable in having at least 20 ways to say “I love you”, hundreds of words to describe particular human types, but NO dirty words or swear words at all – though it has innumerable lurid curses…

Nollaig fé shéan agus Athbhliain fé mhaise agaibh go léir –
Happy Christmas & New Year to all

 

[Patrick_Eastin]

Please return to the topic at hand or start a new thread.

 

[numealinesimpet]

Please return to the topic at hand or start a new thread.

My apologies, Moderator.
Although the question of language is, objectively, peripheral, it does feed into some of our basic motivations and feelings. As with the question of a minority language, the question of Latin does raise strong feelings on both sides. We older generation (or some of us, anyway) do feel deeply the loss of Latin. But as a trad I have often had to explain that it is not the deepest issue by a long chalk. In following the fortunes (& misfortunes) of the SSPX over the years I have often felt that the Vatican people in charge were extremely slow to understand this. As a result, there was lack of communication and frustration on both sides.

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

I have complained about people not showing reverence before and after mass, I wonder how many of them claim to be traditional? It’s not about them any more, it used to be, but not any more, which is why I now pop in to church when nobody is there to pray in silence.

This is false. You can still be traditional. It isn’t so much about the themselves, but traditionalists would rather more highly revere God during Mass than focus on themselves. A higher degree of respect and honor given to the Lord is never bad. At least they’re trying, unlike many who don’t even believe in the real Presence. You see, Vatican II had nothing to do with removing traditionalist people in exchange for polar opposite non trad. higher emotional modernist types,

The thing is, we have these new things in place, such as donuts, because people do not fellowship as they used to with the early church, something has to get people to stick around long enough to mingle, and this is an area the protestants have over us, they stick around and talk to each other after service, which is a good thing to do, they also have extensive bible studies with a lot of them as well right after service, and again, it’s something we lack.

This is wrong. Doughnuts have no place in the church vestibule. People can talk all they want outside. Mingle outside. Jesus is in the Church. People are praying in the Church. It’s called irreverent, let along plain rude to others who want to talk to Jesus.

Church isn’t a dining hall, it’s Jesus’s house. The only food that should be allowed in everychurch is Jesus’ Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the Holy Eucharist.

We have bible studies in the Catholic Church. They have not place in Mass. People can congregate, chatter, hold meeting, throw parties, whatever on their own time. It’s completely up to the person whether to join. We Catholics are not a sola scriptura group, however. We study the Bible and tradition during the Mass. We study it elsewhere. It has nothing do do with not having enough “togetherness”. The chattiness during and after Mass is far too much in many churches anyway.

Too often we complain about these changes, or add on’s, but if you look at the reasoning in full, you’ll see it’s for the greater good, even though it distracts many of us, they are necessary.

Doughnuts and chatter are not necessary. They were never added on in Vatican II, no matter what anyone says. It’s irreverent.

I have no gripe against bad singing, however. I think people need to sing, regardless of whether they have talent. It makes others want to sing louder and it praises God.

 

[yosupman]

Well, look through how the pharisee were behaving, how Christ denounced them and their ways. Sure, they were as traditional as it gets, they crossed every t, dotted every i, they were just absolutely perfect with their rituals, but they completely missed the spirit of it all, for it’s easy to follow a cookie cutter system rather then getting real and avoiding legalism.

I face tremendous scrutiny and will continue to do so since I’d rather follow the spirit, rather then just the law, and this is the defining difference Christ taught, this is precisely why he simplified the law within the new covenant.

I think it’s unfair to characterize the pre-Vatican II liturgy as “cookie cutter”, and as legalistic. The liturgy is something that transcends the individual. This is why there are liturgical laws.

I would suggest you read Cardinal Ratzinger’s “The Spirit of the Liturgy”. Then you’ll understand the true “spirit” of the law.

 

[numealinesimpet]

… My voice is horrible, and only recently have I started to sing in Mass, so please excuse those of us with bad singing voices, I more than make up for it with my guitar, but they don’t let me bring that one in.

The difference is that the Liturgy is not a private or personal thing, like a party at which people sing hymns. It is the Public Work of the Body of Christ. Therefore it should be done as well as possible.

Reading the history of the Liturgy from the very beginning, one can see there has always been a tension between creativity and tradition. Hymns in particular have never sat entirely easily in the Liturgy itself.

I don’t want to sound Pharasaical, but liturgical music ought, in my opinion, to be of a fairly professional standard, otherwise it should be reserved for a get-together afterwards. Then we can sing our hearts out!

… people do not fellowship as they used to with the early church, something has to get people to stick around long enough to mingle, and this is an area the protestants have over us, they stick around and talk to each other after service, which is a good thing to do, they also have extensive bible studies with a lot of them as well right after service, and again, it’s something we lack…

As for the Early Church, that might belong in a later discussion. I think it is a mistake to think we can re-create what we think those days were like.

But the Protestants are in a different situation from the Catholics at Mass. Every protestant sect is a group of like-minded people. Why wouldn’t they get along together? You see, if there is a disagreement, some of them just move off and shop around for a different ‘assembly’, or else start up their own. Standing in a Catholic pew, however, I can be rubbing shoulders with someone with whom I have absolutely nothing in common –except that we both follow the Catholic Faith. We are bound together by a spiritual bond as the Members of the Body of Christ. Remember that passage in the Imitation of Christ: * ‘We must be charitable to all, but it is not expedient to be intimate with many’*. Also, if what we believe is really true – that the Catholic Church is the real thing, and the Protestant sects an attack on the True Vine, it stands to reason that it is the Catholic congregations which the devil will tempt to disunity, inflaming petty quarrels, and that he will try to encourage the others as a temptation to disappointed Catholics and others. So I maintain that the camraderie of the Protestants is, after all, only a red herring. We see the camraderie of a few dozen: the Catholics are a Mystical Body of one billion souls.

 

[yosupman]

Yes, I did. My reply was to Seagal who was bashing the Traditional Catholics here.

Cradle - As issues and disagreements are discussed between those that attend the OF and the TLM, I think the main point should be an attitude of gentleness and charity (which I have violated myself).

Also, these forums are actually good to learn. I have argued with some different folks, but in those arguments, I’ve learned my faith better.